Does the oldest university in the United States discriminate against Asian applicants? In Boston, a lawsuit begins on Monday that could set the tone for the United States. The Students for Fair Admissions association has sued the elite Harvard University.
The main allegation: Asian and Asians, who excel in excellence, are systematically disadvantaged in softer ratings of personality. The lawsuit was filed in 2014. In the course of the trial, Harvard had to disclose the applicants' secret claims.
According to "Students for Fair Admissions", the data show that the origin and color of the skin are not only important, but decisive factors in the admission to the study. "For an Asian candidate who has a 25 percent chance of being accepted by his grades, that chance would rise to 35 percent if he were white," a CNN report quoted in the statement of grounds. "If he were Latino, the chance would be 75 percent, he would be African American even 95 percent."
Affirmative Action is intended to protect minorities
The Harvard officials categorically reject these allegations. From their point of view, this is a misinterpretation of the evaluated assessments. At the same time, they acknowledge that origins and ancestry are among the many factors in the evaluation of applicants. This is permissible in the context of so-called positive discrimination.
In 1978, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling prohibiting quota rules for admission to the study, but authorized skin color and origin as criteria for assessing applicants. The Affirmative Action aims to ensure that minorities have easier access to higher education.
Behind "Students for Fair Admissions" is the conservative legal strategist Edward Blum, who has been trying for a long time to overturn the affirmative action. Prior to Harvard, Blum had sued the University of Texas for allegedly penalizing alleged white students. The trial involved Abigail Fisher, a student who had been denied admission to study in 2008. After a year-long trial, the Supreme Court dismissed its claim in 2016.
Does Kavanaugh become the decisive factor?
If the current lawsuit also landed in front of the US Supreme Court, from which both sides emanate, Blum pays off better chances. The reason for this are the Donald Trump named Conservative Judge Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, whose nomination was heavily controversial because of the rape charges against him.
The deciding vote in the 2016 trial was that of Judge Anthony Kennedy, who was just replaced by Kavanaugh. How important the appointment of Kavanaughs to the US president could be shown in this case. The Trump administration had already announced the affirmative action the fight last year.
Indeed, if a new landmark decision were passed that contradicted the 1978 judgment, it would affect not only Harvard but all US universities. This could help Asian students - but make it difficult for other ethnic minorities to access higher education.