The Asian-American amici in Fisher part ways due to fundamental disagreements about how affirmative action functions and its potential for positive social change. Fisher's supporters assume that affirmative action must necessarily lump Asians into a single, undifferentiated category. We show this is not the case, and explain how, consistent with Grutter and Gratz, affirmative-action plans can consider differences among applicants of the same racial background.
Ultimately, what separates us is confidence in the value of diversity. The handful of Asian-American organizations supporting Fisher do not seem to believe that consideration of race and ethnicity has any legitimate, beneficial role in educational admissions. This informs their analysis of what drives admissions bias against Asian-Americans, as well as their belief that no affirmative-action plan can benefit Asian-Americans who face educational disadvantages, are from underrepresented ethnicities or contribute unique perspectives to campus life due to their racial experience. In contrast, we believe firmly in the value of racial and ethnic diversity in education. We know that lawful affirmative action does not permit racial discrimination, and we have faith in its potential to benefit students of all races.
Khin Mai Aung is director of the Educational Equity Program at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, where she conducts national advocacy and legal representation concerning civil rights in public elementary through high schools and in higher education. She can be reached at kaung@aaldef.org. Robert Toone is a partner at Foley Hoag focusing on financial and commercial litigation, education and government investigations. He can be reached at rtoone@foleyhoag.com.
Subscribe to The National Law Journal
-
ohareedw
Going back a number of years, colleges always had a "diversity" aspect to their admissions policy. With the introduction of Affirmative Action, there was a hard and fast "club" to have a specific type of diversity. Unfortunately, the classifications are way too broad. "Black" can mean lots of things: individuals who are Haitian American, Jamaican American, etc. or African American (greater than second generation). And that sub-category has lots of possibilities as background. The specific conversation here is "Asian" (presumably Asian American). However, that background could be Chinese, Japanese, Korean and a myriad of other countries of original origin - all with different cultural perspectives. To put all of these backgrounds into a single bucket does everyone a disservice. I am all for giving the truly disadvantaged a "leg up," but I would want to see true attempts at success prior to the admission rather than just a category.
-
RogerClegg
1. I see: So it's okay to discriminate against Asians in favor of African Americans and Latinos, but it's not okay to discriminate against Asians in favor of whites. Very principled.
2. Re: "First, it is imperative that all discrimination against Asian-Americans in educational admissions be eliminated." If African Americans and Latinos are getting racial preferences (as it is admitted they are and as the writers support), then other groups (whites and Asians) ARE being discriminated against. Re: "Second, colleges and universities should take into account the tremendous ethnic ... diversity among Asian-Americans." Wouldn't it be better to ignore the ethnicity of all applicants, Asian and non-Asian alike?
Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.
Reader Comments