Advancing Justice – Los Angeles (AAAJ-LA) held a press conference moments ago to announce that lawyers with the group will represent two Asian American & Pacific Islander (AAPI) high school students who wish to present their support of race-conscious affirmative action admission before the Supreme Court if and when the justices hear arguments next year about an anti-affirmative action lawsuit filed against the school by Edward Blum, the architect behind Abigail Fisher’s earlier failed attempts to dismantle affirmative action before the Court.
The two AAPI high school students represented by AAAJ-LA are current applicants to Harvard University, and both believe that race-conscious affirmative action is beneficial; AAAJ-LA filed paperwork yesterday to help the students join an existing group of diverse students who will have “amicus plus” status to present their support for affirmative action in a pending anti-affirmative action case, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc v. President and Fellows of Harvard College.
As the year winds down to a close, these are the top ten political stories that had a major impact on the AANHPI community highlighting the many political issues that have defined the AANHPI community this year. Sadly, many didn’t receive much mainstream media coverage.
How many of these stories were you following this year?
This is a problematic finding for Asian American opponents of affirmative action, because the belief that Harvard exercises an anti-Asian cap quota is one of the primary reasons they cite to argue that affirmative action is unconstitutional, and violates Fourteenth Amendment protections for Asian American students.
Another major argument that Asian American opponents of affirmative action cite is that Asian American students are being admitted into Harvard at a lower admission rate than non-Asian American students because we are overrepresented in the applicant pool.
Sounds like another testable hypothesis, albeit a harder one to really get at since the numbers aren’t published by Havard or any other private academic institution. Still, I asked myself today, is this also something we can crunch the numbers on?
That criticism was echoed on BigWOWO, where blogger Byron Wong wrote, “If [the poll’s question wording] is not a loaded question, I don’t know what is.” Among his other concerns, Byron went on to advocate for an alternative question wording that limited scope to college admissions, saying:
Most people have heard the debate about college admissions since it affects everyone. People already know that college affirmative action makes it more difficult for Asian and white kids to get into selective colleges. People already have their views.
The basic premise is that had a survey polled Asian American (or specifically Chinese American attitudes) on affirmative action in college admissions, and asking whether or not these policies hurt Asian American acceptance rates, the answer would reveal a resounding majority opposition to race-conscious affirmative action.
Not satisfied, it seems, to simply disprove these nay-sayers, the primary investigators of this year’s surveys on Asian American political opinions have now “clapped back” with an abundance of evidence that almost completely dismantles these (apparently baseless) criticisms.