cawacko
Well-known member
Dumb question but can private Universities admit who ever they want as opposed to state funded public Universities? Or if a private University receives any amount of federal money it is held to the same standards as state schools?
Lawsuit Accusing Harvard of Anti-Asian Bias Revives Scrutiny of Affirmative Action
Asian students recently asked Harvard for data showing academic performance of enrolled students by ethnicity
The Justice Department’s new focus on affirmative action is shining a spotlight on a decades-old debate: whether the benefits of using race in college admissions outweigh the costs.
The question is part of a high-profile lawsuit accusing Harvard University of discriminating against Asian-American applicants.
The federal lawsuit, filed in Boston in 2014, was brought by a nonprofit called Students for Fair Admissions, which alleges that Harvard intentionally discriminates against Asian-Americans in its admissions practices by limiting the number of Asian students who are admitted and holding them to a higher standard than students of other races. The group claims the school’s practices violate federal civil rights law and equal protection under the 14th Amendment.
Members of the nonprofit, which advocates for the elimination of affirmative action, include Asian students who were denied admission to Harvard.
The lawsuit’s allegations formed the basis for a separate complaint against Harvard filed in 2015 by a coalition of 64 Asian-American groups. On Wednesday, the Justice Department announced it would begin an investigation of the complaint, which was filed with the department’s civil rights division and other government agencies.
It’s unclear whether the Justice Department will also seek to intervene in the federal lawsuit against Harvard.
Asian-American groups have been raising concerns about the fairness of Ivy League admission practices since at least 1989.
In this case, lawyers for the plaintiffs say their goal is to reach the Supreme Court and overturn racial preferences in university admissions. As part of the lawsuit, the students are asking the judge to prohibit Harvard from using race as a factor in future undergraduate admissions decisions.
Harvard has defended its policies by pointing to a handful of Supreme Court precedents over the past 40 years that have allowed universities to consider race as a factor in admissions to obtain the benefits of a diverse student body.
Harvard’s admissions process reviews many factors and “considers each applicant as a whole person, consistent with the legal standards established by the U.S. Supreme Court,” said a spokeswoman for the university.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the idea that universities have a compelling interest in assembling a diverse student body because it promotes “cross-racial understanding” and better prepares students for a diverse workforce. In a 2003 ruling involving the University of Michigan Law School, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote that classroom discussion is more enlightening with students of different backgrounds, resulting in better learning outcomes.
In the Harvard lawsuit, the plaintiffs are challenging parts of that premise.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs in May asked Harvard to turn over data showing the academic performance and academic preparation of enrolled students by ethnicity. The request is part of the plaintiffs’ argument that Harvard’s admission of underrepresented minorities who they say are less academically prepared ends up hurting those students in the long run. Known as the “mismatch theory,” the plaintiffs say underprepared minority students get lower grades and opt out of difficult majors in college, reinforcing damaging stereotypes.
The plaintiffs hope to use any data provided by Harvard on student performance by race to show that affirmative action has a negative effect on certain students after they enroll. Such a finding could undermine the justification for considering race in admissions decisions.
The lawsuit also proposed race-neutral ways for the university to achieve diversity, such as giving more weight to socioeconomic status or eliminating legacy preferences, which primarily help white and wealthy applicants to the detriment of minorities.
Harvard’s response to the request is under seal. A spokesman for WilmerHale, the law firm representing Harvard, declined to comment.
In an brief filed earlier in the case, a group of current and prospective Harvard students said the mismatch theory has been repeatedly disproved. They pointed to research showing that while the selectivity of a school doesn’t increase earnings for students as a whole, it does for black and Latino students. These students achieve higher grades and graduate at higher rates than their peers at less selective schools, the brief said.
Last year, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs ruled that Harvard wasn’t required to produce academic performance data of enrolled students, but said the court may reconsider the issue at a later time. Judge Burroughs did order the university to turn over comprehensive admissions databases.
She also required four top high schools, including Stuyvesant High School in New York and Thomas Jefferson High School in Alexandria, Va., to respond to subpoenas by the plaintiffs seeking evidence of possible discrimination by Harvard, including depositions of guidance counselors or school officials.
The case against Harvard has proceeded even after the Supreme Court last year upheld the use of racial preferences in public university admissions, in a case brought by a white applicant against the University of Texas at Austin.
In the 4-3 ruling, Justice Anthony Kennedy left the door open to future legal challenges by saying universities must continue to review their affirmative action policies to assess their positive and negative effects.
The challenge against the University of Texas was spearheaded by Edward Blum, a conservative legal activist who is also the president of Students for Fair Admissions, the group suing Harvard. Mr. Blum’s group filed a similar lawsuit against the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2014. The case is still pending.
Affirmative action has long been a divisive issue in the Asian-American community. On Thursday, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, a civil rights group, said it opposed discrimination against Asian-Americans while also supporting affirmative action, which are “separate and distinct” issues. The group said low-income Asian-Americans benefit significantly from affirmative action policies.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/lawsui...e-SB11040995073009253777304583308281089735660
Lawsuit Accusing Harvard of Anti-Asian Bias Revives Scrutiny of Affirmative Action
Asian students recently asked Harvard for data showing academic performance of enrolled students by ethnicity
The Justice Department’s new focus on affirmative action is shining a spotlight on a decades-old debate: whether the benefits of using race in college admissions outweigh the costs.
The question is part of a high-profile lawsuit accusing Harvard University of discriminating against Asian-American applicants.
The federal lawsuit, filed in Boston in 2014, was brought by a nonprofit called Students for Fair Admissions, which alleges that Harvard intentionally discriminates against Asian-Americans in its admissions practices by limiting the number of Asian students who are admitted and holding them to a higher standard than students of other races. The group claims the school’s practices violate federal civil rights law and equal protection under the 14th Amendment.
Members of the nonprofit, which advocates for the elimination of affirmative action, include Asian students who were denied admission to Harvard.
The lawsuit’s allegations formed the basis for a separate complaint against Harvard filed in 2015 by a coalition of 64 Asian-American groups. On Wednesday, the Justice Department announced it would begin an investigation of the complaint, which was filed with the department’s civil rights division and other government agencies.
It’s unclear whether the Justice Department will also seek to intervene in the federal lawsuit against Harvard.
Asian-American groups have been raising concerns about the fairness of Ivy League admission practices since at least 1989.
In this case, lawyers for the plaintiffs say their goal is to reach the Supreme Court and overturn racial preferences in university admissions. As part of the lawsuit, the students are asking the judge to prohibit Harvard from using race as a factor in future undergraduate admissions decisions.
Harvard has defended its policies by pointing to a handful of Supreme Court precedents over the past 40 years that have allowed universities to consider race as a factor in admissions to obtain the benefits of a diverse student body.
Harvard’s admissions process reviews many factors and “considers each applicant as a whole person, consistent with the legal standards established by the U.S. Supreme Court,” said a spokeswoman for the university.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the idea that universities have a compelling interest in assembling a diverse student body because it promotes “cross-racial understanding” and better prepares students for a diverse workforce. In a 2003 ruling involving the University of Michigan Law School, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote that classroom discussion is more enlightening with students of different backgrounds, resulting in better learning outcomes.
In the Harvard lawsuit, the plaintiffs are challenging parts of that premise.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs in May asked Harvard to turn over data showing the academic performance and academic preparation of enrolled students by ethnicity. The request is part of the plaintiffs’ argument that Harvard’s admission of underrepresented minorities who they say are less academically prepared ends up hurting those students in the long run. Known as the “mismatch theory,” the plaintiffs say underprepared minority students get lower grades and opt out of difficult majors in college, reinforcing damaging stereotypes.
The plaintiffs hope to use any data provided by Harvard on student performance by race to show that affirmative action has a negative effect on certain students after they enroll. Such a finding could undermine the justification for considering race in admissions decisions.
The lawsuit also proposed race-neutral ways for the university to achieve diversity, such as giving more weight to socioeconomic status or eliminating legacy preferences, which primarily help white and wealthy applicants to the detriment of minorities.
Harvard’s response to the request is under seal. A spokesman for WilmerHale, the law firm representing Harvard, declined to comment.
In an brief filed earlier in the case, a group of current and prospective Harvard students said the mismatch theory has been repeatedly disproved. They pointed to research showing that while the selectivity of a school doesn’t increase earnings for students as a whole, it does for black and Latino students. These students achieve higher grades and graduate at higher rates than their peers at less selective schools, the brief said.
Last year, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs ruled that Harvard wasn’t required to produce academic performance data of enrolled students, but said the court may reconsider the issue at a later time. Judge Burroughs did order the university to turn over comprehensive admissions databases.
She also required four top high schools, including Stuyvesant High School in New York and Thomas Jefferson High School in Alexandria, Va., to respond to subpoenas by the plaintiffs seeking evidence of possible discrimination by Harvard, including depositions of guidance counselors or school officials.
The case against Harvard has proceeded even after the Supreme Court last year upheld the use of racial preferences in public university admissions, in a case brought by a white applicant against the University of Texas at Austin.
In the 4-3 ruling, Justice Anthony Kennedy left the door open to future legal challenges by saying universities must continue to review their affirmative action policies to assess their positive and negative effects.
The challenge against the University of Texas was spearheaded by Edward Blum, a conservative legal activist who is also the president of Students for Fair Admissions, the group suing Harvard. Mr. Blum’s group filed a similar lawsuit against the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2014. The case is still pending.
Affirmative action has long been a divisive issue in the Asian-American community. On Thursday, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, a civil rights group, said it opposed discrimination against Asian-Americans while also supporting affirmative action, which are “separate and distinct” issues. The group said low-income Asian-Americans benefit significantly from affirmative action policies.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/lawsui...e-SB11040995073009253777304583308281089735660
