Racial Discrimination in College Admissions Is Unacceptable

E very year, nearly 3 million high-school students apply to the college or university of their choice and wait anxiously to receive their acceptance letter. Years of studying, preparation for standardized tests, dedication to extracurricular activities, and interview practice have all culminated in that moment. But for some students, these achievements and hard work might not matter in the eyes of admissions officers. It should be unimaginable that in 2022, certain colleges and universities are discriminating against applicants solely on the basis of their race.

This fall, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA v. Harvard), in which the plaintiff alleges that Harvard unlawfully discriminates against Asian-American applicants in violation of the Civil Rights Act. As members of Congress from the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives, we are proud to lead 80 of our colleagues in filing an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs in this case. Racial discrimination, be it at the workplace, the corner store, or the halls of our schools and universities, is unconstitutional, and, frankly, un-American.

Reports released in 2018 showed that Harvard University rated applicants on traits such as “positive personality,” likability, courage, kindness, and being “widely respected” as part of the admissions process. Records showed that Harvard systematically rated Asian Americans lower than other racial groups in these categories, putting Asian Americans behind all other racial groups, and seriously hurting these applicants’ chances of admission.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and yet for years prominent schools have used race and ethnicity to supposedly “balance” classes and surreptitiously meet self-imposed racial quotas. In 2003, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in Grutter v. Bollinger holding that colleges or universities may use race in admissions “to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits from a diverse student body.” This ruling paved the way for the discriminatory admissions policies seen in schools today. Even then, however, the Supreme Court recognized that the justification for racial discrimination in higher education would diminish with the passage of time. The SFFA v. Harvard case will give the Supreme Court an opportunity to overturn the faulty precedent it set forth in Grutter. We believe it should. Shutting the door to applicants based on race is wrong.

In the admissions process, there are many factors that students can control — their grades, work ethic, commitment to serving their communities, or their dedication to extracurricular activities. Race is not on this list. Nor should it be weighed during the admissions process, especially in a way that harms deserving applicants. According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, nearly three-quarters of Americans agree. In 1996, Californians voted to pass Proposition 209, which banned racial preferences in public hiring, education, and contracting. It was modeled after the Civil Rights Act. Before Prop. 209 was passed, the four-year graduation rate for underrepresented racial minorities in the University of California system was 31.3 percent. By 2014, that had increased to 55.1 percent. The six-year graduation rate is even better, increasing from 66.5 percent in 1998 to 75.1 percent in 2013.

In 2020, California Democrats proposed Proposition 16, a state constitutional amendment to bring back racial preferences in hiring, contracting, and the state’s education system. Californians overwhelmingly rejected it.

Racial discrimination is happening — and not just in one or two schools. It’s happening in high schools, colleges, and universities across the country. In 2020, the Department of Justice filed a case alleging that Yale University was “race balancing” in its classrooms, leading to discrimination against Asian-American and white applicants. But the Biden administration dropped the suit less than a month after Joe Biden’s presidency began. Just recently, the Supreme Court allowed Thomas Jefferson High School in Virginia to continue its admissions process that parents say disproportionately hurts Asian-American applicants. This is totally wrong and sets a dangerous precedent.

Congressional Democrats are willfully ignoring this discrimination. Last year, every single Senate Democrat voted against a ban on federal dollars going to schools that discriminate against Asian Americans.

We should be working together to stop this kind of blatant discrimination in its tracks — not exacerbating it through college admissions. We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will take this opportunity to remedy the injustice of the Grutter decision and allow each student to achieve the American dream based on character, not skin color.

Congresswoman Michelle Steel, a first-generation Korean American, represents California’s 48th congressional district. Ted Cruz is the junior senator for Texas.