

Asian-Americans and Competing Rationales for Affirmative Action in Higher Ed - cwan
http://volokh.com/2009/10/17/asian-american-applicants-and-competing-rationales-for-affirmative-action-in-higher-education/

======
tokenadult
"I think that private universities such as Princeton should be free to engage
in whatever kind of affirmative action they want."

That may be the blogger's opinion, but that is not the law of the land. In
fact, higher education institutions are prohibited from discrimination on the
basis of race,

<http://www.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/raceoverview.html>

and one student who filed a complaint

[http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaintprocess.ht...](http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaintprocess.html)

against Princeton under that process found that his complaint was broadened
into a compliance review, which still hasn't been resolved as of the last
press report on the review.

<http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2008/09/08/21307/>

~~~
parse_tree
but the article said:

"the Supreme Court, in its 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger ruled that
diversity is a permissible objective for the use of racial preferences in
admissions"

~~~
tokenadult
That's for a narrowly tailored program. An explicit quota would still be
illegal (the Bakke decision was not overruled by Grutter) and a system of
giving every minority applicant more points than other applicants would also
be illegal under Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003) (decided the same day
as Grutter v. Bollinger).

