--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Welcome to Today Explained. I'm Sean Rameswaram.
--:-- [Discussion begins]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Today, we're talking about a lawsuit against Harvard University, and how it could potentially end affirmative action as we know it. Our guest is Hua Xu, a staff writer at The New Yorker. Hua, thanks for joining us.
--:-- Hua Xu: Thanks for having me, Sean.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: So, let's start with the story of Michael Wong, a high school student from California who felt like he was being unfairly denied admission to Harvard. He's not the plaintiff in this case, but his story is at the center of it.
--:-- Hua Xu: That's right. Michael Wong was a senior at James Logan High School in California's Bay Area. He had really high grades, aced all the standardized tests, and did a lot of community work. But he didn't get into any of the four schools he applied to, including Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Princeton.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what he realized was that other people at his high school had gotten into some of these schools, and he started to think about what made their cases stronger than his.
--:-- Hua Xu: That's right. And one thing he realized was that none of these other people were Asian. It spoke to this informal belief among Michael and some of his friends that to be Asian American and to be applying to these elite schools, you had to be extra good.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: So, Michael Wong started looking into whether this was true, and he began to ask questions that really captured the imagination of some anti-affirmative activists and Asian Americans, particularly middle-class, newer immigrants living in California.
--:-- Hua Xu: That's right. And these two constituencies are now at the forefront of this Harvard lawsuit, which could potentially end affirmative action as we've known it for the past decade.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Now, the plaintiff in this case is not Michael Wong, but an organization run by an older white guy named Ed Blum. He's a legal strategist who's been behind a bunch of other affirmative action suits and voting rights suits in the country.
--:-- Hua Xu: That's right. Ed Blum is the key person behind this lawsuit, and he's been working with an organization called Students for Fair Admissions.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what's interesting is that Ed Blum used to argue that white people were being disadvantaged by affirmative action policies, but now he's arguing that Asian Americans have been disadvantaged by affirmative action policies.
--:-- Hua Xu: That's right. And it's been suggested that Asian Americans kind of emerged as the ideal political pawns in this effort. Ed Blum needed Asian plaintiffs, and finding plaintiffs to challenge the Ivy League admissions policies, Harvard in particular, is not an easy thing to do.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: So, how do Ed Blum and the SFFA think Harvard is discriminating against Asian-Americans?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, they're saying that by and large, Asian American students have higher test scores, better grades, even more prolific extracurricular resumes. But they're saying that it's the personal category that often negates the prospects of an otherwise strong candidate.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what's the argument that Harvard is making in its defense?
--:-- Hua Xu: Harvard is saying that diversity is not just about race, but also about academic disciplines, geography, background in terms of income, and the educational achievement of parents.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And isn't it interesting that Harvard is saying that it doesn't discriminate against Asian American students, but it does discriminate to make sure that 40% of the white students who go to this school get in on account of athletics or because their parents went to Harvard?
--:-- Hua Xu: Yeah, that's a pretty interesting point. And it's been suggested that Harvard is throwing itself under a bus to avoid being thrown under an even bigger bus.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: So, what do young Asian Americans think about this lawsuit? Has this been a rallying point for them, or is it just limited to high-achieving East Asian Americans who are trying to get into the best university in the world?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, if you look at the polling data, 73% of Asian Americans, not including Chinese Americans, support affirmative action. And even among Chinese Americans, 4 in 10 say they support affirmative action.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: So, what happens if the Massachusetts court sides with Ed Blum and the SFFA?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, either way, there will be an appeal, and it will likely work its way up to the Supreme Court. And if it does, a lot of people are nervous that this will mark the death knell for affirmative action everywhere.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Hua Xu, thanks for joining us today.
--:-- Hua Xu: Thanks for having me, Sean.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: [Discussion continues with Hua Xu]
--:-- [Break in the conversation]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Welcome back to Today Explained. I'm Sean Rameswaram.
--:-- [Discussion continues]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: So, let's go back to the history of affirmative action. Hua, can you tell us a bit about how it started?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, affirmative action actually traces back to FDR and the New Deal. The Wagner Act required employers to bargain collectively with organized workers, and the Supreme Court opposed it, but ultimately, it became constitutional.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And how did affirmative action evolve from there?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, in the 1960s, President Kennedy issued an executive order urging government institutions and contractors to act affirmatively in promoting policies of non-discrimination.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what was the initial impetus for affirmative action?
--:-- Hua Xu: The initial impetus for affirmative action was to make up for the sins of the past. It was clear that entire classes of individuals in the United States didn't start at the same starting line as everyone else.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And when did affirmative action start to get challenged?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, in the 1970s, the courts began to figure out which interpretations of affirmative action were actually constitutional and which were not.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what was the landmark case in this regard?
--:-- Hua Xu: The landmark case was the Bakke decision in 1978. The Supreme Court ruled against the admissions policy at the University of California, Davis, but also created the notion of diversity that we use today.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And how did the public think about affirmative action at this point?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, there were certainly people who thought affirmative action wasn't radical enough, and some people even thought it wasn't worth thinking about because there was so much more that the government could do.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what was the turning point in the affirmative action debate?
--:-- Hua Xu: I think the turning point was in the early to mid-90s in California, with the passage of Proposition 209, which outlawed affirmative action in government contracting and higher education.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what happened with Proposition 209?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, it was associated with a black businessman named Ward Connerly, who said it was about bringing equality to the state of California and ending discrimination against Chinese kids and Vietnamese kids who were excelling in their studies over blacks and Latinos and Native Americans.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what was the impact of Proposition 209?
--:-- Hua Xu: The population of Black and Latino students in the UC system really plummeted, and it took them some time to recover and figure out ways to bring that kind of diversity back to the UC system.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And how did affirmative action end up being just about college admissions into some of the most elite universities in the country?
--:-- Hua Xu: I think a lot of it has to do with the Bakke decision, which destroyed an entire rationale for affirmative action. The best rationale for affirmative action continues to be, in my mind, as amends for the past. But that's an argument that you're no longer allowed to make.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Hua Xu, thanks for joining us today.
--:-- Hua Xu: Thanks for having me, Sean.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: [Discussion continues with Hua Xu]
--:-- [Break in the conversation]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Welcome back to Today Explained. I'm Sean Rameswaram.
--:-- [Discussion continues]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Hua, can you tell us a bit about the story of Abigail Fisher, who sued the University of Texas over affirmative action?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, Abigail Fisher was a white student who was rejected by the University of Texas, and she sued the school, claiming that she was rejected in favor of minority applicants with lower grades and test scores.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what was the outcome of that case?
--:-- Hua Xu: The case went all the way to the Supreme Court, but ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the University of Texas.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what's the connection between Abigail Fisher's case and the Harvard lawsuit?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, Ed Blum, the key person behind the Harvard lawsuit, was also involved in the Abigail Fisher case.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what's the significance of the Abigail Fisher case in the context of affirmative action?
--:-- Hua Xu: The Abigail Fisher case was a big deal because it was one of the last affirmative action cases to go to the Supreme Court.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Hua Xu, thanks for joining us today.
--:-- Hua Xu: Thanks for having me, Sean.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: [Discussion continues with Hua Xu]
--:-- [Break in the conversation]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Welcome back to Today Explained. I'm Sean Rameswaram.
--:-- [Discussion continues]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Hua, can you tell us a bit about the current state of affirmative action?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, affirmative action is still a contentious issue, and the Harvard lawsuit is just the latest development in a long and complex story.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what's the potential impact of the Harvard lawsuit on affirmative action?
--:-- Hua Xu: If the Massachusetts court sides with Ed Blum and the SFFA, it could potentially end affirmative action as we know it.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: And what would happen if the Supreme Court gets involved?
--:-- Hua Xu: Well, if the Supreme Court gets involved, it could potentially mark the death knell for affirmative action everywhere.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Hua Xu, thanks for joining us today.
--:-- Hua Xu: Thanks for having me, Sean.
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: [Discussion continues with Hua Xu]
--:-- [End of conversation]
--:-- Sean Rameswaram: Thanks for listening to Today Explained. I'm Sean Rameswaram.
