Racial Quotas Are Another Form of Discrimination

Racial preferences in American college admissions are anathema to those who share the views of Dr. Martin Luther King. The civil rights icon preached judging people on the content of their character not the color of their skin. Yet most colleges today use some form of race-based formula to admit students.

Perhaps, the most egregious example is that Ivy League bastion Harvard. Students for Fair Admissions (SFA) sued Harvard in 2020 for using "racial classification" to discrimination against Asian Americans. In that case, the U.S. attorney general for civil rights argued before the First Circuit Court:

"Harvard monitors the evolving composition of the class by race at evert stage in the process. The application summary sheets used by admissions officers use race. First readers use race, second readers use race, subcommittees use race. The overall rating Harvard assigns each applicant uses race."

In the quest to achieve equity, Harvard's rules discriminate against primarily Asians, but whites too. Colleges continue to argue for racial preference based on the discrimination against African-Americans 60 years ago. Institutions cling to the rationale that blacks are unable to compete on a level playing field. 

Harvard's race-based policies are unambiguous. Here's the racial make-up of Harvard 2026 class: 42.5% white; 14.4% black; 27.6% Asian; 11.9% Hispanic and 3.6% Native American or Hawaiian.  The university's de facto policy is to exclude Asian applicants because they are overrepresented.  

Harvard, despite its liberal reputation, has a shameful history of discrimination,  In 1925, students of Jewish faith represented 27.6% of the campus.  Their numbers had increased from 10% in 1909.  The university decided it had a "Jewish problem" and was determined to limit admissions to Jews.

In 1926, the university discarded its academic admissions standard and changed its policy to focus on "character," a subjective tool to exclude "brilliant scholars."  It was a charade based on its desire to lower standards to admit more non-Jewish students of "average intelligence."  

Harvard and other universities believe without subjective admission policies, blacks would fail on their merit. This is demeaning to African-Americans and blatant racial discrimination. This isn't equality. It's the height of hypocrisy that universities embrace Critical Race Theory yet practice discrimination. 

This year the U.S. Supreme Court will take up racial allotments when it hears arguments involving the Harvard case and one associated the University of North Carolina.  The court has the opportunity to overturn a precedent set in 1978 when the justices first ruled on affirmative action in higher education. 

This should be a slam dunk decision for the court based on the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act.  Racial preferences violate Title VI of the Civil Rights act of 1964.  The 14th Amendment prohibits the denial of any person "the equal protection of the laws." 

But the court has shied away from overturning racial preferences because justices fear being branded anti-African American. The high court also is reluctant to overturn precedence set in past decisions upholding affirmative action. 

Public opinion supports an end to racial preference. A Pew Research Center poll in 2020 found 73% of Americans did not believe that race or ethnicity should be a factor in college admissions. Majorities of white, black, Hispanic and Asian respondents agreed. Pew ran the same poll this year.  The numbers had not changed.

Dr. King passionately championed equality for all races, black or white or brown.  He abhorred the idea of favoring one race over another. He believed America should stand for equality for all.  That concept should overcome whatever case precedent has been established by the Supreme Court.