image image


Trump to revoke Obama-era guidance using race in school admissions, amid battle over ‘bias’ against Asians

The decision comes amid a high-profile court action against Harvard University, accused of unlawfully limiting Asian admissions

PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 04 July, 2018, 4:17am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 04 July, 2018, 9:19pm

The Trump administration is rescinding Obama-era guidance that encouraged schools to take a student’s race into account to promote diversity in admissions, a US official said on Tuesday.

The shift would give schools and universities the federal government’s blessing to take a race-neutral approach to the students they consider for admission.

The Malaysian-Taiwanese teen who cracked every Ivy League school wants to be...

The action comes amid a high-profile court fight over admission of Asian students at Harvard University as well as US Supreme Court turnover expected to produce a more critical eye toward schools’ affirmative action policies.

The high court’s most recent significant ruling on the subject bolstered colleges’ use of race among many factors in the college admission process.

But the opinion’s author, Justice Anthony Kennedy, announced his resignation last week, giving US President Donald Trump a chance to replace him with a justice who will be more reliably sceptical of affirmative action.

A formal announcement was expected later Tuesday from the Justice and Education departments, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorised to speak on the record.

Harvard ‘is biased against Asian-Americans’, US court is told as rejected applicants sue

The new policy would depart from the stance taken by the Obama administration, which in a 2011 policy document said schools had a “compelling interest” in ensuring a diverse student body, and that while race should not be the primary factor in an admission decision, schools could lawfully consider it in the interest of achieving diversity.

“Institutions are not required to implement race-neutral approaches if, in their judgment, the approaches would be unworkable,” the guidance said. “In some cases, race-neutral approaches will be unworkable because they will be ineffective to achieve the diversity the institution seeks.”

The administration issued a similar guidance document in 2016 aimed at giving schools a framework for “considering race to further the compelling interests in achieving diversity and avoiding racial isolation”.

The Obama approach replaced Bush-era policy from a decade earlier that discouraged affirmative action programmes and instead encouraged the use of race-neutral alternatives, like percentage plans and economic diversity programmes.

The Trump administration signalled it planned to reinstate the Bush administration’s philosophy. Such guidance does not have the force of law, but schools could use it to help defend themselves against lawsuits over their admission policies.

The US Justice Department in the Trump administration has sided with Asian-American plaintiffs suing Harvard who argue that the school unlawfully limits how many of Asian students are admitted.

Students for Fair Admissions, the group suing Harvard, is led by Ed Blum, a white legal strategist who also helped white student Abigail Fisher sue the University of Texas for alleged discrimination in a case that went to the US Supreme Court.

Blum said Tuesday that the organisation “welcomes any governmental actions that will eliminate racial classifications and preferences in college admissions.”

Civil liberties groups immediately decried the move, saying it went against decades of court rulings that permit colleges and universities to take race into account.

How the IB encourages curiosity and why it is important in today’s world

“We condemn the Department of Education’s politically motivated attack on affirmative action and deliberate attempt to discourage colleges and universities from pursuing racial diversity at our nation’s colleges and universities,” Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said in a statement.

In 2016, the Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Kennedy, granted affirmative action policies a narrow victory by permitting race to be among the factors considered in the college admission process.

Kennedy wrote that the University of Texas’ admission plan was in line with past court decisions that allowed for the consideration of race to promote diversity on college campuses.

The ruling bitterly disappointed conservatives who thought that Kennedy would be part of a Supreme Court majority to outlaw affirmative action in education. Justice Antonin Scalia died after the court heard arguments in the case but before the decision was handed down.

The new affirmative action guidance could add to an already contentious fight over the next Supreme Court justice.

With Trump expected to announce his nominee next week, the issue should be a central part of any confirmation process, said the dean of the Howard University School of Law, Danielle Holley-Walker.

She called the new guidance “highly unfortunate and counterproductive” and said the decision is another indication that the Justice Department, under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is likely to be fairly aggressive toward schools that do continue to factor in race in admissions decisions.

“People have been talking about precedent in regard to Roe v. Wade” – the landmark 1973 ruling affirming a woman’s right to abortion – “but it’s important to remember that affirmative action has been a precedent for the past 40 years,” she said. “This is a clear attack on precedent. Any Supreme Court nominee needs to be asked if they support precedent related to affirmative action.”

Eight states already prohibit the use of race in public college admissions: Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.