This is completely justified. Affirmative action is outdated and needs to be
This is completely justified. Affirmative action is outdated and needs to be eliminated.
On Monday, federal lawsuits against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill were filed alleging that both universities discriminated against white and Asian American students as a result of their race-based affirmative action policies.
The Project on Fair Representation (POFR), which is spearheading the suit on behalf of a new organization called Students for Fair Admissions, argues that both Harvard and UNC follow policies that admit African Americans and Hispanics over better-qualified Asians. In the case of Harvard, POFR also accuses the school of having a hard quota for how many Asians are admitted to the school, which they compare to the school’s quota on Jews that existed prior to World War II.
The lawsuit represents a follow-up effort to Fisher v. University of Texas, a 2013 Supreme Court case in which POFR fell short in an effort to have all racial affirmative action abolished.
In that case the court ruled that racial affirmative action may be acceptable in order to achieve diversity at a school, but that such affirmative action is subject to “strict scrutiny,” the highest standard of judicial review for a policy. Under strict scrutiny, a narrow violation of certain constitutional rights is acceptable as long as it achieves a compelling government interest and there is no alternative method of achieving that interest other than said restriction.
In these new lawsuits, POFR argues that UNC and Harvard cannot meet the burden of strict scrutiny because other, more constitutional means could be used to establish diversity.
The lawsuit represents new territory in the campaign by activists seeking to abolish affirmative action. In the past, efforts have focused exclusively on public universities. Harvard, however, is a private university, which traditionally have had more leeway to set their own policies. The new lawsuit argues that despite its private status, Harvard is still subject to the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause via Article VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination by all institutions receiving federal funds.
Both schools have defended their admissions policies, with Harvard telling The Associated Press their holistic approach to applicants had been explicitly held up as acceptable by the Supreme Court in its 1978 ruling University of California v. Bakke.
However, according to POFR, Harvard’s holistic admissions are really just a thin veneer for a highly racially-oriented policy. Their lawsuit points out that Harvard’s Asian population rose swiftly throughout the 80s and early 90s (as America’s Asian population surged) but then abruptly stagnated in the 90s at around 16.5 percent and has barely moved since.
In comparison, at schools that explicitly do not use racial affirmative action, such as Caltech and the University of California system, Asians are about twice as common as they are at Harvard. Harvard’s efforts to keep the number of Asians down are so great, POFR says, that two different applicant pools exist, one for Asians and one for everybody else.
Even playing field. Harvard should take a stand against Affirmative Action. There is no need to discriminate against anyone based off skin color or socioeconomic background. If you don’t get in, MAYBE you’re just not good enough?!