Groups that successfully sued Harvard last year to end affirmative action in college admissions are now threatening to investigate whether the university is complying with the new rules and sue if they find that it is not.
The group Students for Fair Admissions is focusing on three universities — Princeton, Yale and Duke — that are seeing significant declines in Asian American enrollment this year compared to last, which the group said was unexpected.
On Tuesday, the group Students for Fair Admissions sent the universities a letter questioning whether they were following the rules set out by the Supreme Court. Princeton, Duke and Yale also saw small differences in the number of black and Hispanic students admitted to their schools for the first time since the Supreme Court struck down race-based admissions policies.
The group, a nonprofit that opposes race-based admissions practices and has represented Asian students in a lawsuit against Harvard, suggested it was positioning itself as an enforcer of the new rules.
“Based on SFFA’s extensive experience, race numbers cannot be truly neutral,” the letter, signed by Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions, said, adding: “You have now been warned. Please preserve all potentially relevant documents and communications.”
It was one of the first warnings to universities struggling to comply with court orders while maintaining a diverse student body, and a sign that the fight over race-based admissions had not ended with the Supreme Court’s decision. The threats also gave universities, notoriously secretive about their admissions processes, an incentive to become even more opaque.
“I think the battle is going to shift from policy to what’s going on in admissions offices,” said William Jacobson, a Cornell law professor and founder of the Equal Protection Project, a conservative nonprofit that has challenged diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
Oiyan Poon, a college admissions researcher and author of “Asian Americans Are Not Colored,” a book released in April about the affirmative action debate, said Blum’s recommendation was premature. Admissions numbers fluctuate, and one year is too early to draw conclusions, he said.
“It’s disappointing to see the same old intimidation tactics being used here by Mr Bloom to threaten universities from doing what they can to give opportunities to bright and talented students,” Dr Poon said.
One variable shaping the current numbers is a sharp increase in the percentage of students who didn’t check a race or ethnicity box on their applications. At Princeton, for example, that number rose to 7.7% this year from just 1.8% last year; at Duke, it rose to 11% from 5%. Universities may not know whether the “unknown” numbers include overrepresented white and Asian American students.
The university is also working to achieve diversity by increasing the percentage of students receiving scholarships from 66% at Princeton to 71%.
“We have been scrupulous in complying with the requirements set forth by the Supreme Court,” Princeton spokeswoman Jennifer Morrill said Tuesday. Yale and Duke did not immediately comment.
“It’s very ironic that Blum now wants to grow enrollment in line with that,” said Oren Sellstrom, litigation director for the Boston-based Lawyers for Civil Rights, which has filed a complaint with the Education Department alleging that Harvard’s previous admissions policies favored white applicants.
Asian American enrollment fell from 35% to 29% at Duke, from 30% to 24% at Yale, and from 26% to 23.8% at Princeton, while black enrollment increased from 12% to 13% at Duke and remained at 14% at Yale, but fell from 9% to 8.9% at Princeton.
In court, Harvard, supported by other universities including Yale, Princeton, and Duke, argued that considering race as one of many factors in an application was the best way to diversify a college’s class. The Supreme Court ruled that giving preferential treatment to students on the basis of race violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act.
The university complied with the court’s ruling and did not allow admissions officers to see the box in which applicants filled in their race and ethnicity until the student had been admitted, the waitlist had closed, and the student had actually enrolled.
But one of the most puzzling aspects of the decision is that the court allowed admissions officers to consider race if it was featured in a student’s personal essay as part of a meaningful story in their life.
In a letter sent Tuesday, Students for Fair Admissions suggested that essays will be a big part of the investigation into the admissions process. The first paragraph of the letter notes that the court has warned against using essays to get around the new admissions rules.
