Harvard v. Affirmative Action: Round 2
This Abridge News topic aggregates four unique arguments on different sides of the debate. Here are the quick facts to get you started:
THE QUICK FACTS
- On Thursday, the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Harvard's affirmative action policy does not violate civil rights law. Last year, a federal judge had originally ruled that Harvard did not discriminate based on race and the plaintiffs appealed that decision shortly thereafter.
- Harvard argued that it considers race as one of many factors in its admissions process (which is allowed under current law) while the plaintiffs argued that Harvard systematically discriminated against Asian Americans.
- The plaintiffs for this case were represented by the non-profit Students For Fair Admissions (SFFA). SFFA founder Edward Blum has indicated interest in bringing the case forward to the conservative-leaning Supreme Court. The SFFA has cases pending against the University of North Carolina and the University of Texas.
- In related news, citizens of California (a state in which affirmative action is banned) recently voted to continue to ban affirmative action for public employment, education, and contracting.
CLICK TO VIEW OPINIONS ranging from For Harvard Policies to Against Harvard Policies