Asian American applicants to Harvard join fight to protect affirmative action

AAAJ-LA photo

Jason Fong (at podium) participates in a press conference defending affirmative action.

ASAM NEWS

TWO ASIAN/AMERICAN students have joined Harvard in its effort to defend the schools affirmative action program for underrepresented students.

Both students are from Southern California and are current applicants to Harvard.

“Asian students and other students of color have to face institutional barriers that many white students may not, so I think it levels out the playing field.” said Jason Fong, one of those two students. 

“I got involved in this case because I feel it’s important for Asian/Americans like myself to ask why we aren’t doing more to fight against racism directly. And as someone who has benefited greatly from being educated in an environment with great diversity in race, class and thought, I believe diversity is a valuable criteria for any campus to embrace.”

Fong is active in expressing his political views on social media and was behind the successful hashtag #MyAsianAmericanStory which captured the attention of even the Los Angeles Times. Fong also is a former intern for AsAmNews.

The other student is a Pacific Islander. Both were assisted by Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Los Angeles.

RELATED:

• AAPIs react to Supreme Court decision supporting affirmative action
• A closer look at anti-affirmative action complaint vs. Ivy League schools
• Asians and affirmative action

“Opponents of affirmative action continue to peddle the myth that affirmative action hurts Asian American students by placing quotas on their admissions into elite colleges in favor of African American and Latino students,” said Nicole Ochi, an attorney with AAJC-LA. “This is an absolute lie. Quotas, in fact, have been unconstitutional for decades.”

Harvard was sued by Students for Fair Admissions, an anti-affirmative group which has filed a series of similar lawsuits against other universities. The suit was filed by an unnamed Asian/American student who was denied admission.

“We refuse to be used as a wedge by outside players stoking the insecurities of newer Asian immigrants, provoking them to lash out at the very programs that have helped communities of color gain access to higher education," said Ochi. 

"In our current political climate where racism and bigotry continue to be normalized, it is more important than ever to acknowledge that race still matters and should not be the only aspect of an applicant’s story that is excluded from consideration in the admissions process.” (View From the Edge contributed to this report._

Supreme Court finds no bias towards Asian/Americans in college admissions

Harvard University, above, faces the same charges of bias as the University of Texas.

By Louis Chan
Reprinted from AsAm News

A  CLOSER LOOK at the majority opinion in Fisher v University of Texas reveals the four Supreme Court Justices found no discrimination against Asian/Americans in holistic admissions.

By a four to three vote, the justices ruled the University of Texas did not discriminate against Abigail Fisher, a White student who did not rank in the top 10 percent of her high school class, when it rejected her application.

Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote:

Therefore, although admissions officers can consider race as a positive feature of a minority student’s applica­tion, there is no dispute that race is but a “factor of a factor of a factor” in the holistic-review calculus. 645 F. Supp. 2d 587, 608 (WD Tex. 2009). Furthermore, con­sideration of race is contextual and does not operate as a mechanical plus factor for underrepresented minorities. Id.,at 606 (“Plaintiffs cite no evidence to show racial groups other than African Americans and Hispanics are excluded from benefiting from UT’s consideration of race in admissions. As the Defendants point out, the consider­ation of race, within the full context of the entire applica­tion, may be beneficial to any UT Austin applicant—including Whites and Asian Americans”); see also Brief for Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund et al. as Amici Curiae 12 (the contention that the University discriminates against Asian Americans is “entirely un­supported by evidence in the record or empirical data”). There is also no dispute, however, that race, when consid­ered in conjunction with other aspects of an applicant’s background, can alter an applicant’s PAS score. Thus, race, in this indirect fashion, considered with all of the other factors that make up an applicant’s AI and PAI scores, can make a difference to whether an application is accepted or rejected.

RELATED: Read the entire ruling by the Supreme Court majority 

The decision is a blow to some Asian/American groups, most of whom represent first-generation Chinese/Americans, who contend Asian/Americans have been rejected and less qualified Blacks, Hispanics and Whites have taken their spots.

It’s also a blow to a lawsuit filed by Students for Fair Admissions, which has actively courted Asian/American groups to its side. The Students for Fair Admissions was founded by Edward Blum, Fisher's attorney, who is associated with several cases trying to dismantle affirmative action programs.

RELATED: Who is really behind the Students for Fair Admissions?

Students for Fair Admissions filed a discrimination case against both Harvard and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill which is very similar to the Fisher case.

“At Harvard, we strive to foster a diverse campus community that prepares our students to thrive as citizens and as leaders in an increasingly connected world and global economy,” Harvard University President Drew G. Faust said. “We are pleased that today’s Supreme Court’s ruling in Fisher v. the University of Texas has upheld this integral value.”

RELATED: Asians being used as pawns to fight affirmative action

Law professor Laurence H. Tribe took it one step further.

In the Harvard Crimson he called the decision in Fisher “favorable to what Harvard has tried to do over the years to overcome racial stereotypes.” He went on to say the lawsuit by Students for Fair Admissions is “overwhelmingly likely to fail.”

However, don’t expect those who contend Asian/Americans are victims of bias to go away.

Affirmative action opponents might be cheered by the dissenting opinion written by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, who read his dissent from his seat:

It pointed to a study showing that African American, Hispanic, and Asian American students were underrepresented in many classes. See Supp. App. 26a. But UT has never shown that its race-conscious plan actually ameliorates this situation. The University pre­sents no evidence that its admissions officers, in adminis­tering the “holistic” component of its plan, make any effort to determine whether an African American, Hispanic, or Asian American student is likely to enroll in classes in which minority students are underrepresented. And although UT’s records should permit it to determine with­out much difficulty whether holistic admittees are any more likely than students admitted through the Top Ten Percent Law, Tex. Educ. Code Ann. §51.803 (West Cum.Supp.2015), to enroll in the classes lacking racial or eth­nic diversity, UT either has not crunched those numbers or has not revealed what they show. Nor has UT explained why the under representation of Asian American students in many classes justifies its plan, which discrim­inates against those students.

(Views From the Edge contributed to this report.) 

###

AAPIs react to Supreme Court's ruling upholding affirmative action's goals

By Louis Chan
Reprinted from AsAm News

By a 4-3 majority, this morning (June 23) the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the use of race in admissions at the University of Texas as constitutional.

The case was filed by Abigail Fisher, a white student, who alleged the university passed her over for admissions in favor of less qualified minority students.

"The Court’s affirmation of the University’s admissions policy does not necessarily mean the University may rely on that same policy without refinement,” Justice Kennedy wrote. “It is the university’s ongoing obligation to engage in constant deliberation and continued reflection regarding its admissions policies.”

RELATED: AAPI groups file briefs in Fisher vs. Texas case

Only seven justices participated in the decision because Justice Elena Kagan recused herself due to her participation in the case when she worked as Solicitor General.

The seat of the late Antonin Scalia remains vacant because the Republican Senate majority refuses to put up the nomination of Justice Merrick Garland for a vote.

RELATED: Asians & affirmative action

“We are pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledges the continued need for affirmative action policies that make it possible for students of all backgrounds, including many historically disadvantaged Asian American and Pacific Islanders, to access higher education and create a stronger country through their contributions to a diverse society,” said Mee Moua, president and executive director of Advancing Justice | AAJC to AsAmNews.

Affirmative action has divided the Asian/American community with second and third generation Asian/Americans generally in support of it, and first-generation immigrants, primarily Chinese/Americans, opposed.

Among those outspoken against affirmative action is 80-20, a political action committee, lead by former Delaware Lieutenant Governor S.B. Woo.

RELATED: A closer look at the complaint vs. Ive League schools

“Asian Americans on average must give 140 SAT points to white applicants,” said Woo this morning to AsAmNews. “It’s such a resounding contradiction that Fisher v University of Tex didn’t emphasize enough. If I had the money, it takes millions, I would challenge the university on exactly that point and work it on that point. Forget the Hispanics, forget the Blacks, just make a straight forward comparison between Asian Americans and White.

Woo pointed out the Supreme Court made it a point to say their decision does not mean the “University may rely on the same policy without refinement.”

“I’m not saying it's a victory at all,” Woo clarified. “It’s a victory for the current admission program. However, know what the court said. It requires refinement.”

###

A closer look at the complaint vs. Ivy League colleges

Most Asian/Americans support affirmative action

ARE ASIAN/AMERICANS being discriminated against by some Ivy League colleges? As a person of color, I just assume discrimination, bigotry, racial bias and stereotyping as just a part of life.here in the United States of America. So - yeah - I believe some Asian/Americans are being victimized by the admissions process employed at some colleges.

But acknowledging bias towards Asian/American students is not the same as being against the practice of affirmative action.

RELATED: Complaint alleges anti-Asian bias in Ivy League

A recent complaint filed with the Department of Education by some Asian/American organizations against Brown University, Dartmouth College and Yale University, implies that Asian/Americans students are being denied admission despite scoring higher on their SATs, better GPA's and more impressive extracurriculars.

It's an old argument that white students employ when they are denied admission to the college of their choice. In fact, a case the Supreme Court will issue a decision soon, Fisher v. University of Texas, uses that argument: affirmative action allowed less qualified students were admitted to the University of Texas while turning away this one white student.

            RELATED: Asians and Affirmative Action
            AAPI groups support affirmative action

The Wall Street Journal jumped on the Ivy League story and other publications followed suit. The stories made it look as if Asian/Americans were against affirmative action. (Full disclosure: I am a beneficiary of affirmative action.)

However, when 160 Asian/American organizations supported the University of Texas affirmative action policy and AAPI legal organizations filed friends of the court briefs in the Fisher case, nary a word from mainstream media and certainly not from the conservative-leaning Wall Street Journal.

Frankly speaking, there are people and groups who would like to do away with affirmative action and they don't care a whit about AAPI admissions. By pitting the "model minority" against other minorities (you've heard about the strategy of divide and conquer?) Asian/Americans are being used to discredit a policy that has helped those who — otherwise — would not have the opportunity to even be considered for admission.

Whenever Euro/Americans attack affirmative action, (and they are the ones who usually do the complaining) it's hard for them to not look like racists. However, if they can pit Asian/Americans against African/Americans and Latinos, they can wash their hands of the debate and still accomplish their goal of dismantling affirmative action.

The bigger story,  (I don't believe any of the mainstream media have done this story), is the apparent divide between new immigrants and the those AAPI who have been here for a generation or more.

Many of the groups behind the complaint are comprised of newly arrived immigrants whereas many of the groups that support affirmative action policies are of second, third and fourth generation.

“Most of the groups who filed the federal complaint are newer organizations comprising foreign-born immigrants, largely from China," writes David Noriega of BuzzFeed. "The groups who led the opposition to the complaint tend to be older civil rights groups with American-born leaders and long-standing relationships with black and Latino activist groups. ‘From a sociological standpoint, that makes sense,’ C.N. Le, a professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, told BuzzFeed News. More recent immigrants, he said, ‘are coming from an idealized image of American society as a meritocracy where everybody should have an equal chance … So, from that point of view, they see affirmative action as this mechanism that discriminates against Asian/Americans.'”

“Efforts to dismantle race-conscious admissions programs are short-sighted. They ignore the historical context for such programs and also serve to marginalize currently underserved communities, including many Asian/Americans and Pacific Islanders,” said Stewart Kwoh, executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Los Angeles. “We oppose quotas on any racial or ethnic groups, which already are prohibited by law. The truth is that affirmative action does not constitute quotas -- it simply takes into account whether an applicant has overcome significant obstacles and institutional barriers, such as racial and ethnic discrimination. We strongly support admissions policies that are inclusive of all underrepresented communities.”

To counter the impression that the AAPI community is against affirmative action, last May 22 an open letter of support for affirmative action as signed by 150+ AAPI organizations and several hundred AAPI individuals. Again, no major media picked it up even though the organizations included some of the oldest, most stable and most active AAPI civil rights organizations.

***

The letter states:

We stand together as organizations across the United States representing Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, in strong support of race sensitive affirmative action policies in higher education.

We believe that equal opportunity is a cherished principle in American society that must be protected, and that our universities should reflect our diverse democracy and expand opportunities for students who have overcome significant barriers. Rather than letting ourselves be divided, we must come together to ensure increased opportunities and success for all students in our nation.

Affirmative action is a holistic approach that promotes diverse educational learning environments essential in our multiracial society. Affirmative action should be firmly upheld in our nation’s institutions of learning, including in Ivy League universities such as Brown, Dartmouth, and Yale.

Affirmative action does not constitute quotas

Unfortunately, there continue to be attempts by some to engage in divisive wedge politics by using misguided, misleading tactics to attack equal opportunity by calling for an end to race sensitive admissions policies at educational institutions such as Brown, Dartmouth, and Yale, as well as Harvard University and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Opponents of affirmative action have wrongfully and disingenuously equated affirmative action with quotas.

The truth is that affirmative action does not constitute quotas.

Affirmative action does not exclude or limit the admission of students from any specific racial or ethnic background. Indeed, the United States Supreme Court long ago prohibited quotas in the higher education admissions process, including banning limits on the admission or enrollment of any racial or ethnic group.

To be clear, we oppose quotas, discrimination, and bias against any racial or ethnic group

Affirmative action promotes equal opportunity for all

We support affirmative action which, as noted above, does not constitute quotas, discrimination, or bias against Asian Americans.

Currently, affirmative action at universities consists of race sensitive holistic admissions policies. These policies promote equal opportunity in a society where racism still exists and racial barriers continue to unfairly limit educational opportunities for students of color. For example, our schools are more segregated today than they were in the late 1960s. Students of color, particularly African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, and Southeast Asians, are much more likely to attend under-resourced K-12 schools. Implicit bias and stereotyping also further impact and harm the educational learning environments and opportunities of students of color. Universities should consider these factors when reviewing applications for admissions.

All students – including Asian Americans – benefit from the racially and ethnically diverse learning environments fostered by race sensitive holistic admissions processes, including the benefits of increased cross-racial understanding, reduction of stereotyping and isolation of minority students, and training for a diverse workforce and society.

Affirmative action simply takes into account whether an applicant has overcome significant obstacles and institutional barriers, such as racial and ethnic discrimination

Affirmative action simply takes into account whether an applicant has overcome racial and ethnic adversity as one of several factors in a holistic review of an applicant’s qualifications, leadership, and potential. Holistic admissions processes also consider, for example, whether an applicant has endured poverty or is the first in her family to attend college.

Moreover, in the context of college admissions, “merit” cannot be quantified by grade point average, SAT scores, or number of activities alone. Instead, life experiences such as overcoming racial and ethnic adversity are critical factors in a student’s leadership and potential contribution to the university and to our society. In addition, numbers, like grade point averages and standardized test scores, are not colorblind and often reflect and magnify K-12 educational inequities.

Equal opportunity strengthens our democracy

Affirmative action policies help to level the playing field and promote diverse university learning environments that are essential in our multiracial and multicultural society. Our democracy benefits from a diverse and educated populace and workforce.

Those who are truly committed to equal educational opportunity should demonstrate real leadership and reinvest in higher education throughout the nation to expand access, affordability, equity, and student success. Decades of disinvestment in higher education across the country have made college less accessible for all students, especially students of color. We call for unity in standing up for the future of our diverse youth and realizing the promise of equal opportunity for all in the United States.

We also call upon our leaders in higher education institutions to uphold race sensitive affirmative action policies in their admissions processes. Especially at this pivotal time of national discourse about the need to fulfill the promise of our democratic ideals for communities of color, it is imperative that universities carry out their important role of advancing inclusion, equity, and educational opportunities for all students in our multiracial democracy.***

This time the Wall Street Journal did mention the letter ... kind of. This is what it reported:

"Support among Asian-Americans isn't monolithic. A group calling itself Asian Americans Advancing Justice issued a statement on Monday saying it fully supports affirmative action in higher education." 

The phrase, "A group calling itself ...?" putting the question into the minds of the readers that the AAAJ was not a legitimate organization. There was not even a mention of the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) or the Organization of Chinese Associations (OCA), two of the oldest civil rights organization in the AAPI community, who also signed the letter. Maybe the problem lies with the Wall Street Journal's view of the world that would do away with government and let the free market reign even if it means creating an oligarchic society where the very few rules over the vast poor masses.

The different viewpoints between recent immigrants and the more established AAPI groups became evident in the case of former NYPD officer Peter Liang and the fatal shooting of Akai Gurley. 

The more recent immigrants wanted justice for Liang, who they felt was the sacrificial lamb  
for all the abuses committed by police.

The AAPI groups and individuals who sided with Gurley's family and their supporters were the more established organization that had long working relationships with African/American justice groups, including Black Lives Matter.

In a book published last summer, "The Asian American Achievement Paradox," Jennifer Lee, a sociology professor at the University of California, Irvine (UCI), and Min Zhou, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), suggest Asian/Americans shouldn't blame affirmative action for perceived injuries, but instead embrace the policy.

"They think it's in their self-interest to fight affirmative action," Lee told NBC News. "But (it is) only in a very narrow way, without thinking of their broader life course. We need affirmative action because we don't have the institutional advantages we think we do.

"The better question (isn't self-interest, but) whether Asian Americans are willing to recognize our ethnic and class diversity," Lee said. "Not all Asian ethnic groups are highly educated and high-achieving; in fact, most aren't. For those who face ethnic and class disadvantages, including Cambodian-, Laotian-, and Hmong-Americans, affirmative action policies will help. It will also help high-achieving groups like Chinese-, Indian-, and Korean-Americans to experience racial and ethnic diversity and better prepare them to work in diverse workplaces." 

The divide between recent immigrants and AAPI who've been in this country for a generation or more is a more complex story that needs to explored, but don't expect the Wall Street Journal to write about it.

###

Lawsuit alleges anti-Asian bias in Ivy League admissions

Reprinted from AsAm News

A COALITION of mostly immigrant groups from the Chinese community is calling on federal authorities to investigate racial bias in admissions against Asian/Americans at Yale, Brown and Dartmouth, reports the Chronicle of Higher Education.

The Asian American Coalition for Education is also urging other Asian/American groups to jointly file complaints against the three Ivy League schools.

The complaint - expected to be released Monday, May 23, to the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Justice - alleges the three schools have the lowest Asian/American admission rates. The groups also contend the University’s admission of Asians has remained flat even though the number of applicants has risen dramatically.

RELATED: Asians and Affirmative Action

Similar complaints against Princeton and Harvard have both failed in the last year.

The issue has divided the Asian/American community with many long established civil rights groups comprised mostly of second, third and fourth generation Asians advocating for affirmative action and immigrant groups opposed.

According to the version of the complaint released early to the Chronicle of Higher Education, the list of groups involved in the latest complaints range from a day care center to the 80-20 Initiative, including:

1. 1045 Custom Mansions Owner Association of Diamond Bar
2. 1441 Manufacture-Home Residents Association
3. 80-20 Initiative (9 organizations)
12. A1 Education LLC
13. Alamo Asian American Chamber of Commerce Education Foundation
14. Allstar Institute
15. Asian American Federation of Florida
16. Asian American Legal Foundation
17. Asian American Republican Coalition of San Diego
18. Asian Americans for Political Advancement
19. Asian Leadership and Cultural Network
20. AsianAmericanVoters.org
21. Beijing University of Technology Alumni Association of America
22. Boston Forward Foundation
23. Boston Fudan Aluminum Association
24. CAN Chinese Action Network
25. China Rainbow Network
26. Chinese America Association of Orange County
27. Chinese American Equalization Association(HQH)
28. Chinese American for Progress and Equality (CAPE)
29. Chinese American Parent Association of Howard County
30. Chinese American Parents Association of Fairfax County
31. Chinese Association Inc.
32. Chinese Association of China Univ of Mining in North American
33. Chinese Association of Science, Education and Culture of South Florida
34. Chinese Community Center of the Capital District of New York
35. Chinese Freemasons
36. Chinese Professional Development Association
37. Chinese Social Service Center
38. Chinese Traditional Culture, Inc
39. Chinese-American Nail Salon Association
40. CSA Afterschool
41. Dallas/Fort Worth Chinese Alliance
42. Epic Healthy Living Education Center
43. First Han International Language School
44. Florida Acupuncture Association
45. Global Organization of Indian Origin – Los Angeles Chapter
46. Great Neck Chinese Association
47. Greater San Antonio Chinese Chamber of Commerce
48. Guqian Academy
49. Harris Chinese Association
50. Health Foundation (TX)
51. Henan Folks Association in North California
52. Houston Chinese Alliance
53. Huazhong University of Science & Technology Alumni Association of Southern California
54. Idaho Chinese Organization
55. Impact Speaking Academy
56. Jacksonville Chinese Association
57. Japanese American Association San Diego
58. Jiao Tong University Alumni Association-Seattle
59. Jin Lan Club
60. Kiangsu Chekiang Association of Northern California
61. Korean American association of greater Philadelphia scholarship foundation
62. Korean American Chamber of Commerce of San Diego County
63. Korean American Women’s Chamber of Commerce
64. Leading Young Professionals Association
65. Livingston Chinese Association
66. Long Island Chinese American Association
67. Long Island Parent of Chinese
68. Michigan Chinese Alliance
69. Michigan New Century Chinese School
70. Millburn Short Hills Chinese Association
71. Minnesota Chinese Association
72. New Asian Leaders
73. New York Shandong Association, Inc.
74. No Tower in Schools
75. Noble Tree Publishing Inc.
76. Northeast Chinese Association
77. Northern California Chinese Culture Athletic Federation
78. Northern California Henri Association
79. OCA Eastern Virginia
80. Ohio Chinese American Association
81. Ohio contemporary Chinese school
82. Orange County Chinese American Chamber of Commerce
83. Orange county ladies group
84. Orlando Chinese Professional Association
85. Pakistan Policy Institute
86. Peking University Alumni Association of Oregon
87. San Antonio Society of Chinese Professionals
88. San Diego Asian Americans For Equality
89. San Francisco Chinatown Merchant Association
90. SCV Chinese School
91. Shah Latif Cultural Institute of Texas (SLCIT)
92. Sharron Art Center
93. Shou Chu Organization
94. Silicon Valley Chinese Association Foundation
95. Sino Professionals Association
96. South Florida Sichuanren & Chongqingren Chinese Association
97. Spring Source Education Institute
98. Star Education Inc.
99. Taiwan Benevolent Association of Florida
100. The Korean Association of Greater Washington
101. The Orange Club
102. The Shanghai Association of America
103. UBC (United for a Better Community)
104. United Chinese Association of Utah
105. Universal Chinese Publishing Group
106. US Asian Cultural Academy
107. USTC Alumni Association in Greater New York
108. USTC Alumni Association of Southern California
109. UT Austin PGE Chinese Alumni Association
110. Vancouver Chinese Association
111. Venus Chinese School
112. Washington Youth Foundation
113. Westlake Chinese Culture Association
114. WW-P Education Support Association
115. Yvonne Liu’s Family Daycare

###

Asian American & Pacific Islander groups support affirmative action in brief to the U.S. Supreme Court

ONCE AGAIN, that old model minority myth about Asian Americans is being used against other minority groups by a Euro/American. The old divide-and-conquer ploy.

But this time, it appears to be a unifying theme and an opportunity for Asian community to express their solidarity with other racial/ethnic groups

In friends-of-the-court briefs filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, over 160 Asian American and Pacific Islander groups -- representing almost all of the ethnicities and racial groups coming from the Asia and Pacific region -- have demonstrated their support for affirmative action that benefits people of color.

"Such broad support for race conscious admissions policies sends a clear message that AAPIs overwhelmingly support these policies and will not be used as a racial wedge to disenfranchise other communities of color," said Laboni Hoq, litigation director at Advancing Justice - Los Angeles.

The briefs were filed today (Nov.3) in a case, Fisher v. University of Texas, that claims discrimination against a white student because of the university's admission policies that attempts to have a diversified student body. Rather than rule on the case, the Supreme Court returned it to the lower court. Abigail Fisher, a Caucasian student, was rejected when she applied to UT-Austin.

Fisher and Rachel Michalewicz, who were denied admission to University of Texas at Austin in 2008, originally filed the case in 2009. Michalewicz withdrew form the case in 2011.

The women alleged the university improperly used race as a factor in admissions. A United States District Court decided in favor of the university in 2009, but the Supreme Court vacated the decision and sent the case back down the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2013, saying that the court failed to apply “strict scrutiny” in its review of the university system’s admissions policy.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals then ruled in favor of the university and dismissed Fisher’s case in July 2014. In June, the Supreme Court announced it would reconsider the case it initially heard in 2013.

In 2013, ProPublica published what became one of the most provocative analyses of the Fisher case. It highlighted an overlooked, deeply ironic fact about the case: when one actually looked at Fisher’s arguments, she actually had not been denied admission because of her race, but rather because of her inadequate academic achievements. 

What the article revealed was that there were dozens of white students who scored lower than Fisher but were admitted to the university; and there were a few African American students who scored higher than Fisher but denied admission. What it seems to show is that Fisher was denied admission because of other reasons other than race and certainly not because of the university's affirmative action plan.

ANALYSIS: Originally published March 18, 2013, by clicking here.

Listen to the Story

Tell Me More

9:08

• Playlist
• Download
• Embed
• Transcript

A closer look at disaggregated data reveals large disparities in educational attainment among Asian American ethnic groups. Based on U.S. Census Bureau data, the educational attainment of Hmong, Cambodian, Laotian, and Vietnamese Americans is the lowest among Asian American ethnic groups and similar to those of Latinos and African Americans. Only 61 percent of Hmong Americans hold a high school diploma, while only 12 percent of Laotian Americans have graduated from college.

"Supporters of Fisher have mischaracterized UT-Austin's race-conscious admissions policy. It can benefit Asian Americans through an individualized review of applicants that avoids harmful stereotypes based on the 'model minority' myth," says AALDEF Executive Director Margaret Fung.

The largest institution of higher learning in the country with perhaps the largest Asian/American student body in the country, the University of California, filed a similar friend of the court brief today in support of affirmative action. University of California President Janet Napolitano and all 10 UC chancellors announced their support for affirmative action in admissions decisions

The amicus brief detailed the UC’s efforts to increase diversity through race-neutral initiatives.

Despite the efforts, UC enrollment figures do not reflect California’s racial demographics, particularly at its most selective campuses, according to the brief. According to the brief, the proportion of minority applicants at UCLA dropped from 22 percent to 18 percent between 1995 and 1998. The admission rate of minority applicants also fell from 52 percent to 24 percent.

"We recognize that Asian Pacific Americans, like other groups, have endured cases of discrimination and lack of opportunities which continue to impact us today. The low numbers of minority groups in the legal profession, government, and corporate leadership underscore the need to remove barriers to higher education and increase diversity," says George C. Chen, president of the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association. "Courtrooms, law firms, and law schools must be filled with people of different backgrounds so that we can better understand and respect the diversity of the American public."

The three AAPI legal organizations that filed amicus briefs are:

• The Asian American Advancing Justice (Advancing Justice). For a copy, visit www.advancingjustice-la.org.
• The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) For a copy, visit http://aaldef.org.
• The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) amicus brief, filed by the Coalition of Bar Associations of Color (CBAC), consisting of NAPABA, the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA), the National Bar Association (NBA), and the National Native American Bar Association (NNABA), . For a copy, visit, www.napaba.org.

Mindy Kaling's brother posed as a black to get into med school

Fighting affirmative action

Vijay Chokal-Ingam, left. His alter ego, Jojo, right.

MINDY KALING, comedian and actress, made a television commercial where she believed she was invisible because that's the way American society treats minorities - as if they weren't there - right in front of their noses.

Kaling's older brother Vijay Chokal-Ingam has authored a book, "Almost Black," that is stirring up so much controversy over race that Mindy may be wishing that he would simply vanish.

Kaling and her brother are children of immigrants from India. He applied to medical school with so-so academics and mediocre MedCAT scores and was ultimately rejected. After altering his appearance slightly, he applied to medical schools as a African American student and was accepted.

His premise, which probably has many white conservatives chortling with glee, is that affirmative action doesn't work because its beneficiaries (in his case: African Americans) with lower requirements exclude qualified candidates, especially Asian Americans. 

In his book, Chokal-Ingam says that he wants to fight what he calls a “system of legalized racism” in higher education. He applied to a score of medical schools but was accepted at only one, St. Louis University. We assume he didn't make the grade in all the other schools, which included Yale and Harvard.

A spokesman for St. Louis medical school said that Chokal-Ingam met their criteria and race was not factor. In his mind, Chokal-Ingam getting accepted in one - ONE - medical school proves that affirmative action was the deciding factor. 

"I was determined to become a doctor and I knew that admission standards for certain minorities under affirmative action were, let's say .. less stringent?" he writes on his website.

There's little evidence to suggest his posing as a "black" applicant helped him get into these schools. First, there is no point of comparison: Chokal-Ingam never applied to medical schools as an Indian-American.

“I hope the story of my experiences will be a catalyst for social change and opposition to affirmative action racism,” he wrote on his website.

His book and its conclusions have been roundly criticized and apparently went against the wish of his younger sister Mindy.

Kaling's press rep told Us Weekly: "Mindy has been estranged from her brother for years. She was not aware of his decision to apply to medical school under a different name and race."

Chokal-Ingam doesn't mention whether or not he reapplied to the same medical schools that rejected him the first time nor does he admit that the whole history of discrimination and bias against African Americans that still impacts their lives today had any influence on his second round of applications.

Posing as an African American student with the same grades and MCAT scores as the Indian American applicant, in 1999 he was accepted into St. Louis University School of Medicine but dropped out after two years.

“Not everything worked out as planned. Cops harassed me. Store clerks accused me of shoplifting. Women were either scared of me or couldn’t keep their hands off me. What started as a devious ploy to gain admission to medical school turned into a twisted social experiment.”

He got a brief taste of what it means to be African American but he failed to learn anything from those experiences. Instead, he positions himself in the same category of his alleged heroes Mahatma Ghandi, Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King.

In his eyes, the story is about him as a victim, as a sacrificial lamb, but the real story is about him as a liar and an opportunist trying to achieve his 15 minutes of fame. 

As might be expected, he got some strong criticism in reaction.

"Whatever you feel about affirmative action, let's consider that one person's experience over a decade and a half ago -- an experience that ultimately didn't yield any deluge in acceptance letters anyway -- is not really indicative of the current state of college admissions," wrote Salon's Mary Elizabeth Williams.

"Nor is it necessarily an exemplary window into the complex and mysterious vetting process of elite institutions," she added. "Instead, Chokal-Ingam's story is one of a successful woman's brother liberally using her name to drum up attention and controversy."

His famous younger sister tried to dissuade him from going public with his deed saying "it would bring shame to the family." He says the tension between him and his celebrity sister is common sibling rivalry.

Conservatives have been trying to pit Asian Americans against African Americans in the affirmative action debate for years now, arguing that qualified Asians have been denied college admission because of affirmative action even though polls show that Asian Americans favor affirmative action.

Currently there are lawsuits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina using that very argument even though the plaintiffs are not Asians but shadow organizations with questionable origins posing as civil rights advocates.

Right now, Chokal-Ingam is the conservatives' darling and I expect he'll milk it as much as he can in order to sell his book. I would not be surprised to see him on a Fox News talk show as Exhibit A in the "we're-not-racist because a person-of-color is the one attacking affirmative action" ploy.

If he really wanted the full black experience, he should try applying for jobs or a mortgage as an African American; he should explain to the police officer that he's not really black when he gets pulled over and harassed; he should try taking a stroll in a predominantly white neighborhood in Anywhere, USA.

I'm truly very sorry, Mindy.

RELATED: Asians and Affirmative Action