African and Latino organizations have filed a lawsuit against Harvard University in response to the Supreme Court’s decision last week to constitutionally eliminate affirmative action.
Monday, the Boston, Massachusetts-based nonprofit Lawyers for Civil Rights (LCR) filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) of the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), alleging that Harvard University’s admissions system violated Title XI of the Civil Rights Act. The lawsuit examines the university’s legacy admissions history.
Together with the University of North Carolina, Harvard was a defendant in the affirmative action case that reached the Supreme Court after Students for Fair Admissions, led by Edward Blum, challenged the use of race-based admissions nationwide.
Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal, executive director of the LCR, asked in a statement, “Why do we reward children for privileges and advantages acquired by previous generations?” The newly filed lawsuit asserts that up to 15 percent of Harvard’s admitted students receive preferential treatment, characterized as “donor and legacy preferences,” and “are substantially more likely to be approved than other applicants.”
The lawsuit states, “Every year, Harvard College gives preferential admissions treatment to hundreds of predominantly white students, not because of their achievements, but because of their relatives. “The first stage in an investigation is to initiate it. Second, declare that this preference-granting practice is discriminatory because it significantly favors Caucasian applicants.”
What About Ethnic Affirmative Action?
The next major battle over college admissions centers on a distinct minority group that receives an advantage: the offspring of alumni.
In the aftermath of a Supreme Court ruling that invalidates affirmative action in admissions, colleges are facing increased pressure to terminate legacy preferences — the practice of giving preference to applicants with familial ties to alumni. Long considered a benefit for the white and affluent, opponents argue that it is no longer justifiable in a world where there is no affirmative action counterbalance.
After the court’s ruling, President Biden suggested colleges reconsider the practice, stating that legacy preferences “expand privilege instead of opportunity.” In light of the court’s decision to remove race from the admissions process, several Democrats in Congress demanded an end to the policy. So did Republicans, including South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination.
For critics of legacy admissions, the revival of the admissions fairness debate has presented an opportunity to sway public opinion in their favor.
As colleges across the United States pledge their commitment to diversity in response to the court’s decision, activists have a straightforward response: prove it. According to activists, if schools want to enroll more Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous pupils, a simple first move would be to eliminate legacy preferences.
“There is no justification for allowing this process to continue,” said Viet Nguyen, a graduate of Brown and Harvard who directs Ed Mobilizer, a nonprofit that has opposed legacy preferences since 2018. “No other country practices legacy preferences. Now is the time to get up to speed with the rest of the world.”
Source: Newsweek 90, wbur local coverage