It’s time to smell one of the big lies about affirmative action that the practice of colleges and universities taking race ethnicity into account in admissions results in discrimination against Asians. For the last 50 years, it’s been white males who claimed that affirmative action amounted to quote, reverse discrimination against them after being laughed out of court, because it’s hard to argue you deserve 2% of the pie. When you already control 98% white males began to use Asians as a stalking horse to help topple affirmative action. The trouble is the claim that Asians are being discriminated against is just as laughable. I bet most civil rights lawyers know it, as do most college admissions officers. They just won’t say it out loud, because they’re afraid that they’ll come across as anti Asian. I’m not anti anyone. As a journalist, I’m just pro truth. And as a Mexican American, with two Harvard degrees, I know the truth about what’s going on in the admissions process at elite schools. Unfortunately, we didn’t find much truth at the Supreme Court, which recently, as expected, struck down the practice of affirmative action in college and university admissions. The cases before the justices involved Harvard and the University of North Carolina, which the plaintiffs claimed were actively discriminating against Asian applicants. All the truth was that the lower courts, which earlier found that the universities were not discriminate against anyone, and trying to achieve and more diverse, and thus and 2023, more realistic, and more relevant student body, the lower courts got there by relying on the facts and the law. Meanwhile, six conservative justices on the Supreme Court, a majority that calls the shots got where they want to go, by relying on politics. There was no suspense about what was going to happen, given that several of the justices had previously spoken out publicly against preferential treatment based on race ethnicity, if it had relied on the facts, and the law, like it was supposed to, the High Court couldn’t follow the lead of the lower courts and found that Asians were not being systemically discriminated against in the way that African Americans and Latinos have been in the past. Let’s just say no governor has ever stood in the doorway of a university to prevent an Asian student from enrolling the way that Governor George Wallace did in the 1960s. To keep black students out of the University of Alabama. In order to make a legitimate and believable claim of discrimination. It would have helped a lot if Asians who applied to Harvard, for instance, could show that the admissions policies at that school demonstrate discriminatory intent or disparate impact. They could show neither. For one thing, no one was making the argument that Asian applicants were inferior or academically deficient like they did with blacks and Latinos. And for another, the undergraduate student body at Harvard is now more than 30%. Asian, where we expect it to believe, as the plaintiffs claimed that being Asian was keeping people out of Harvard. That’s shocking. Has anyone shared that news with the nearly one in three Harvard students who are in fact Asian? See, I’m a veteran of the affirmative action wars. My take goes back 39 years way back to the spring of my senior year in high school in 1985. That’s when white friends and classmates with grades and SATs scores that were inferior to mine told me that if quote, I hadn’t been Mexican, I would not have gotten into Harvard and Yale, Stanford, Princeton, UC Berkeley, you get the idea. I’ve studied and written about this topic, affirmative action longer than I have any other and here’s what I believe we’re having the wrong discussion. Instead of trying to make victims out of people who have not been victimized, we should instead talk about whether preferential treatment in college admissions based on race and ethnicity hurts those that it was intended to help. I believe it does. It’s a shame that the opponents of affirmative action didn’t care enough about its real victims, to even start that conversation.
Ruben Navarrette
Columnist, host & author
Commentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
Is the US looking for a war?
8 hrs ago
Peter Zeihan
How future generations could shift US support for Israel
Yesterday
Peter Zeihan
Why election of European Commission president is so important
Wednesday
Peter Zeihan
‘Both completely corrupt’: What Americans think of Biden, Trump
Tuesday
Dr. Frank Luntz
Affirmative action does not discriminate against Asian Americans
Ruben Navarrette
Columnist, host & author
By Straight Arrow News
The Supreme Court’s landmark decision on June 29 to gut affirmative action has now made it illegal for colleges to consider race as a specific factor in their admissions process. The plaintiffs argued that Harvard admissions unfairly held Asian Americans to a higher standard when it comes to objective measures like test scores, while giving them low marks when relying on personality metrics.
Straight Arrow News contributor Ruben Navarrette says that the Supreme Court ruling was driven by politics and way off base. According to Navarrette, If college admissions programs are guilty of any discrimination, it is against Black and Brown applicants, not Asian Americans who are well represented in the student body.
It’s time to smell one of the big lies about affirmative action — that the practice of colleges and universities taking race and ethnicity into account in admissions results in discrimination against Asians.
For the last 50 years, it’s been white males who claimed that affirmative action amounted to “reverse discrimination” against them, after being laughed out of court, because it’s hard to argue you deserve 2% of the pie when you already control 98%.
White males began to use Asians as a stalking horse to help topple affirmative action. The trouble is the claim that Asians are being discriminated against is just as laughable. I bet most civil rights lawyers know it, as do most college admissions officers. They just won’t say it out loud because they’re afraid that they’ll come across as anti-Asian. I’m not “anti” anyone. As a journalist, I’m just pro-truth. And as a Mexican American, with two Harvard degrees, I know the truth about what’s going on in the admissions process at elite schools.
Unfortunately, we didn’t find much truth at the Supreme Court, which recently, as expected, struck down the practice of affirmative action in college and university admissions.
It’s time to smell one of the big lies about affirmative action that the practice of colleges and universities taking race ethnicity into account in admissions results in discrimination against Asians. For the last 50 years, it’s been white males who claimed that affirmative action amounted to quote, reverse discrimination against them after being laughed out of court, because it’s hard to argue you deserve 2% of the pie. When you already control 98% white males began to use Asians as a stalking horse to help topple affirmative action. The trouble is the claim that Asians are being discriminated against is just as laughable. I bet most civil rights lawyers know it, as do most college admissions officers. They just won’t say it out loud, because they’re afraid that they’ll come across as anti Asian. I’m not anti anyone. As a journalist, I’m just pro truth. And as a Mexican American, with two Harvard degrees, I know the truth about what’s going on in the admissions process at elite schools. Unfortunately, we didn’t find much truth at the Supreme Court, which recently, as expected, struck down the practice of affirmative action in college and university admissions. The cases before the justices involved Harvard and the University of North Carolina, which the plaintiffs claimed were actively discriminating against Asian applicants. All the truth was that the lower courts, which earlier found that the universities were not discriminate against anyone, and trying to achieve and more diverse, and thus and 2023, more realistic, and more relevant student body, the lower courts got there by relying on the facts and the law. Meanwhile, six conservative justices on the Supreme Court, a majority that calls the shots got where they want to go, by relying on politics. There was no suspense about what was going to happen, given that several of the justices had previously spoken out publicly against preferential treatment based on race ethnicity, if it had relied on the facts, and the law, like it was supposed to, the High Court couldn’t follow the lead of the lower courts and found that Asians were not being systemically discriminated against in the way that African Americans and Latinos have been in the past. Let’s just say no governor has ever stood in the doorway of a university to prevent an Asian student from enrolling the way that Governor George Wallace did in the 1960s. To keep black students out of the University of Alabama. In order to make a legitimate and believable claim of discrimination. It would have helped a lot if Asians who applied to Harvard, for instance, could show that the admissions policies at that school demonstrate discriminatory intent or disparate impact. They could show neither. For one thing, no one was making the argument that Asian applicants were inferior or academically deficient like they did with blacks and Latinos. And for another, the undergraduate student body at Harvard is now more than 30%. Asian, where we expect it to believe, as the plaintiffs claimed that being Asian was keeping people out of Harvard. That’s shocking. Has anyone shared that news with the nearly one in three Harvard students who are in fact Asian? See, I’m a veteran of the affirmative action wars. My take goes back 39 years way back to the spring of my senior year in high school in 1985. That’s when white friends and classmates with grades and SATs scores that were inferior to mine told me that if quote, I hadn’t been Mexican, I would not have gotten into Harvard and Yale, Stanford, Princeton, UC Berkeley, you get the idea. I’ve studied and written about this topic, affirmative action longer than I have any other and here’s what I believe we’re having the wrong discussion. Instead of trying to make victims out of people who have not been victimized, we should instead talk about whether preferential treatment in college admissions based on race and ethnicity hurts those that it was intended to help. I believe it does. It’s a shame that the opponents of affirmative action didn’t care enough about its real victims, to even start that conversation.
No one is innocent in Trump assassination attempt
After the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, both Democratic and Republican leaders have called for reducing divisive rhetoric. Some Republicans blame the shooting on the language Democrats used in attacking Trump. Meanwhile, some prominent Republican lawmakers, such as Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., have used similar rhetoric, calling Biden “a clear and present threat…
Tuesday
America must fix its broken Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court was envisioned by America’s founding fathers as an independent judiciary separate from the political world, designed as a fair arbiter of the law. But the 6-3 conservative majority of today’s Supreme Court has issued a number of impactful, partisan and unpopular opinions on everything from abortion access to presidential power, triggering…
Jul 16
Despite Biden’s stumble, rambling Trump can’t win debate
The first presidential debate of 2024 resulted in what many believe was a clear winner and loser. President Joe Biden’s performance was universally panned, affecting his fundraising efforts and intensifying calls for his ousting. Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump, despite being criticized for his false claims during the debate, has kept a low profile, opting…
Jul 9
Why Republicans will never shut down US-Mexico border
A group of Republican senators expressed “grave concerns” to President Biden over his recent executive order that would provide a path to citizenship to approximately 500,000 people who have been in the country for a decade or more and are also married to United States citizens. The GOP lawmakers argued that Biden’s immigration relief “directly contravenes…
Jul 2
Why Democrats’ immigration playbook not working with Latino voters
In June 2012, as President Barack Obama campaigned for reelection, he ordered immigration enforcement agents to defer action against those who had arrived in the United States as children. This executive action, known as DACA, offered a path to work permits for hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants. That November, Obama cruised to reelection, beating…
Jun 25
Underreported stories from each side
Group accuses Pa. teachers union of illegally using money to back Shapiro’s 2022 campaign
8 sources | 0% from the left
Getty Images
Some House Republicans slam Vance as Trump’s VP pick: ‘The worst choice’
8 sources | 0% from the right
Reuters
Latest Stories
Congress still trying to figure out how to reduce wasteful military spending
Watch 2:29
3 hrs ago
US Navy, Air Force making waves with new weapons at RIMPAC
Watch 6:03
3 hrs ago
Israeli PM Netanyahu meets with Trump at Mar-a-Lago
Watch 2:54
3 hrs ago
Growing US nuclear power resurgence reaches the nation’s heartland
Watch 1:19
3 hrs ago
Beer from the sun, other solar thermal projects get government funding
Watch 2:04
3 hrs ago
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Trump has an excellent opportunity with Black voters
8 hrs ago
Star Parker
Don’t fall for GOP’s cheap racist attacks on Kamala Harris
9 hrs ago
Dr. Rashad Richey
Americans must reject Trump to defend our democracy
Yesterday
Jordan Reid
Why all the changes in European parliamentary governments?
Wednesday
Newt Gingrich