ASAM NEWS
DESPITE CHARGES of discrimination against Asian Americans, attorneys for Harvard maintain the real goal of the lawsuit against it is to eliminate all consideration of race in admissions, reports CNN.
Harvard attorneys made that statement in closing arguments Friday (Nov. 2) in the three-week long trial asserting that Harvard intentionally penalizes Asian Americans in their “personal rating,” despite high academic scores.
Both sides gave their closing argument in the case Friday that will ultimately be decided by U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs.
Students for Fair Admission, led by Edward Blum, says Harvard intentionally keeps the admission rate of Asian Americans below 20 percent despite statistically having the highest test scores among all ethnic groups. Blum stated that his goal is to eliminate total consideration as race as a factor for admission to Harvard.
Blum's critics believe a ruling for the plaintiffs would eliminate the use of any affirmative action and work against qualified, but underrepresented, minorities.
The class of 2022, the latest to be admitted to Harvard is made up of 23 percent Asian Americans, 15 percent African Americans and 12 percent Latinos.
Admittance to Harvard is highlty competitive. At stake are 1600 spots for admissions from 40,000 applicants.
In the class of 2019, 8,000 applicants had perfect GPAs and 5,000 had perfect math and verbal SAT scores. You don’t have to be a math whiz to understand all of those students could not be admitted, making the ultimate choices highly debatable and subjective.
“That Asian Americans get worse personal ratings year after year is pretty strong evidence that racial bias has crept into the system,” attorney John Hughes said in closing arguments for the plaintiffs, reported MSN.
Harvard countered that there is “almost no correlation” between “personal rating” and academics while acknowledging that Asian Americans score lower personal ratings, on average.
Harvard's lead attorney William Lee, an Asian American representing his alma mater, pointed out that Students for Fair Admissions has previously unsuccessfully challenged affirmative action using white applicants and only lately has recruited Asian American students.
He also praised the Harvard students and alumnae, the majority of whom were Asian Americans, who spoke in favor of the race criteria and pointed out that no Asian Americans testified on behalf of SFFA.
"We've heard from the students themselves. We've heard from the students who are living diversity every day," Lee said in his concluding remarks. "Although much progress has been made, there is much to be done."
A decision from Judge Burroughs is not expected for months. The judge has indicated she will hold a post-trial briefing with all parties to discuss any remaining issues.
Win or lose, both SFFA and Harvard said they would appeal if the decision goes against them. It is expected that the case will make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Views From the Edge contributed to this report.
________________________________________________________________________________
Harvard attorneys made that statement in closing arguments Friday (Nov. 2) in the three-week long trial asserting that Harvard intentionally penalizes Asian Americans in their “personal rating,” despite high academic scores.
Both sides gave their closing argument in the case Friday that will ultimately be decided by U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs.
Students for Fair Admission, led by Edward Blum, says Harvard intentionally keeps the admission rate of Asian Americans below 20 percent despite statistically having the highest test scores among all ethnic groups. Blum stated that his goal is to eliminate total consideration as race as a factor for admission to Harvard.
Blum's critics believe a ruling for the plaintiffs would eliminate the use of any affirmative action and work against qualified, but underrepresented, minorities.
The class of 2022, the latest to be admitted to Harvard is made up of 23 percent Asian Americans, 15 percent African Americans and 12 percent Latinos.
Admittance to Harvard is highlty competitive. At stake are 1600 spots for admissions from 40,000 applicants.
In the class of 2019, 8,000 applicants had perfect GPAs and 5,000 had perfect math and verbal SAT scores. You don’t have to be a math whiz to understand all of those students could not be admitted, making the ultimate choices highly debatable and subjective.
“That Asian Americans get worse personal ratings year after year is pretty strong evidence that racial bias has crept into the system,” attorney John Hughes said in closing arguments for the plaintiffs, reported MSN.
Harvard countered that there is “almost no correlation” between “personal rating” and academics while acknowledging that Asian Americans score lower personal ratings, on average.
Harvard's lead attorney William Lee, an Asian American representing his alma mater, pointed out that Students for Fair Admissions has previously unsuccessfully challenged affirmative action using white applicants and only lately has recruited Asian American students.
He also praised the Harvard students and alumnae, the majority of whom were Asian Americans, who spoke in favor of the race criteria and pointed out that no Asian Americans testified on behalf of SFFA.
"We've heard from the students themselves. We've heard from the students who are living diversity every day," Lee said in his concluding remarks. "Although much progress has been made, there is much to be done."
A decision from Judge Burroughs is not expected for months. The judge has indicated she will hold a post-trial briefing with all parties to discuss any remaining issues.
Win or lose, both SFFA and Harvard said they would appeal if the decision goes against them. It is expected that the case will make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Views From the Edge contributed to this report.
________________________________________________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment