Harvard Won a Key Affirmative Action Battle. But the War’s Not Over.
This Tuesday, 1 Oct 2019, federal judge Allison D. Burroughs ruled that there was no explicit bias in Harvard’s treatment of Asian-American applicants. What might seem like a major victory for Harvard is actually what Mr. Blum, the legal strategist who incited the case, expected. Over 40 years ago, the Supreme Court struck down explicit quotas for minority representation in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. However, they ruled that consideration of race in the form of affirmative action was legal as long as the goal was to achieve a diverse student body, rather than repair past racial injustices as the UC system’s program sought to do. Because the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land, only it has the power to reverse this ruling. SFFA, the plaintiff in this case, is expected to take the case to the Supreme Court in the hopes that it will strike down affirmative action, especially with the conservative Supreme Court picked by Trump.
California has a state law, Proposition 209, which bans consideration of race in college admissions, including affirmative action. Following Prop 209, UCs spent billions on race-blind college outreach programs in low-income areas, and eventually achieved a minority acceptance rate equal to pre-Prop 209 levels. However, even though the percentage of students it accepts that come from minority backgrounds is the same, the percentage of minority students that are accepted or even eligible are lower than that of white students. Instead, many incoming students are international students, boasting flawless academic records and paying exorbitant tuition fees, while bringing much-sought-after racial diversity to UC campuses, much to the ire of those who believe they are displacing disadvantaged minorities.
- Should affirmative action and other programs meant to promote racial diversity focus on assisting disadvantaged minorities, or just promote racial diversity regardless of the economic status of those minority students?
- Do you believe it is the responsibility of universities to remedy racial inequality, or should they simply accept the best students? Should attempts to remedy inequality start much sooner?
- Do you believe universities are able to remedy racial inequality?
- As seen in the chart, Harvard’s undergraduate class has more white students than students of the next three races combined. Does affirmative action really harm Asian-Americans, or do they need it just as much as other minorities? If there is discrimination against Asian-Americans, is it affirmative action, or is it in fact the opposite?
I think affirmative action based off of race is definitely not the answer to years of discrimination and segregation, since the direct result of that segregation was the socioeconomic gap that we see today. In order to remedy it, affirmative action that helps low socioeconomic statuses would be the answer, since it would apply to everyone, not just a specific race. Also, while the university should have the choice whether they want to use admissions as a way to remedy racial equality, ultimately higher education isn't supposed to be a vehicle to solve societal problems. It is intended as the next step after high school for people who want to learn more in depth with a topic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Victor in that affirmative action should be based off of socioeconomic status rather than race, for I believe that the benefits that affirmative action provides for minorities come at the cost of those who are not minorities. Since race is not something that you are in control of, it should not be something that is counted for or against you in the application process. Despite this being an attempt to bring diversity, it is in the form of discrimination against certain racial groups. In response to the question 4, I am not sure as to whether affirmative action would increase the quota for Asian-Americans, but I personally think that admitting only a certain number of students in a race is disciminatory in itself since categorizes people and divides them up, upsetting the playing field for each individual student.
ReplyDeleteI agree with those above, that racial affirmative action is definitely not the answer. Instead, socioeconomic affirmative action would probably be better because it encompasses racial affirmative action as well. But I also think colleges should just accept the best students overall and not have affirmative action at all. Because the issue really is rich people buying their way in and legacy. And affirmative action doesn’t address that at all. Instead, it cuts exceptional candidates to make the racial or socioeconomic required amounts because there is no way they are cutting the rich kids or legacy kids. And I do believe that colleges should take a decent amount of responsibility for racial inequality because it is the rich white kids that make up the majority of universities, even if they are not the most qualified applicant, and that certainly puts them ahead in the workforce. So ultimately people’s careers start in college and if colleges are being racist or elitist, they are a significant cause of racial and socioeconomic inequality.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I believe that socioeconomic status should be taken into consideration, I fully support affirmative action on the basis of race. While slavery, segregation, and the aftermath of such horrors has not left all Black people or people of color in the lowest socioeconomic status, these terrible events have impacted such communities so drastically that most are still feeling the effects today. The above arguments are a bit contradictory, as they acknowledge the socioeconomic impact segregation has had on communities of color, but argue for a socioeconomic based action, rather than a racial one, even though it is largely people of color that would benefit from such aid. Institutional and individual racism continuously hinder people of color from benefiting from the same educational opportunities as other races, namely whites and Asians. Additionally, the comments above imply that if it weren't for affirmative action, more qualified candidates would be accepted. That is not the case. Since communities of color have been so ravaged by racism, many have not had the tools, as I previously mentioned, to excel and appear on paper as other races have. Affirmative action actually levels the playing field and provides those students with a chance to have the same educational opportunities as privileged races. I do agree with the previous comments regarding universities' preferential treatment of legacies and rich white kids. This is definitely wrong and universities should be held accountable.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Leila in that I also support affirmative action on the basis of race. I think universities have an obligation to create a diverse community, which should include economic status and race, among other things. This means that universities should help disadvantaged minorities, because if qualified, they are just as entitled to attend the university as someone with from a privileged background. While I do believe attempts to remedy this situation should occur much earlier, universities must also do their part in ensuring that disadvantaged students of color can have an opportunity to attend and thrive at their school, namely black and brown people. This can be done by making more of an effort to encourage students intimidated by the system, and to take into consideration various factors that may have hindered their achievements, such as poverty, instability in the household and discrimination. Affirmative action is not 'racist' or being unfair, it is simply giving minorities who have long been oppressed a chance to not be restricted.
ReplyDeleteI would say that racial diversity is an essential feature of a good academic or for that matter any environment. Studies have consistently shown that diverse groups come up with better solution for problems. Therefore it is extremely beneficial for students to begin working with those of other races and ethnicities while still at University. Therefore, affirmative action is essential to achieve that diversity. On the question of whether affirmative action harms Asians. Asians make up 5.6% of the American population, while they make up 17.1% of Harvard's student body, that's over three times more. Therefore, Asians are clearly not being discriminated against in the admissions process.
ReplyDelete