AAPI Politics Briefing Special Issue: Where affirmative action goes from here

In two rulings split along ideological lines, the high court found Harvard and the University of North Carolina to be in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, which says states cannot “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Race-based college admissions, often referred to as affirmative action, allows universities to consider race in admissions alongside other factors.

But SFFA claimed that Harvard discriminates against Asian American applicants through subjective standards that rate them based on perceived personal characteristics.

The court ruled that affirmative action policies at the two universities “unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with fellow conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett voted in favor of SFFA, while Jackson dissented with Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. 

“Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life,” Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “But … the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race.”

"With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces 'colorblindness for all' by legal fiat. But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life,” Jackson wrote in her dissent.

“Without affirmative action advocating for college admissions offices to view students as holistic people, I wouldn’t be who I am now,” wrote Vietnamese American educator Ngan Nguyen in a column for Reappropriate. “I know many students like me—a first generation, low-income, Asian American student—wouldn’t have had the opportunity to pursue what we wanted if it wasn’t for affirmative action.”

Roughly half of Asian Americans who have heard of affirmative action say it is a good thing. Respondents expressed mixed feelings about the idea of considering race in college admissions, however, and assessments differed slightly by ethnic group. Indian adults (60%) were more likely than Korean (50%), Vietnamese (48%), and Chinese (45%) adults to say affirmative action is a good thing, according to Pew.

“This is a historic victory for Asian Americans, because our children will no longer be treated as second-class citizens in college admissions,” Yukong Mike Zhao, president of the Asian American Coalition for Education, said in a statement. “Moreover, the ruling will abolish the only remaining race-based law, advancing America toward a color-blind society.”

The decision could “very well mean that Harvard and other elite universities finally can no longer use 'diversity' as a smokescreen to impose ceilings on groups that they disfavor," S.B. Woo, president of 80-20 Educational Foundation, said earlier this month.

Of the six most-populous ethnic groups in America (Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Korean, Vietnamese, and Japanese), Indian Americans have the highest share of college degree holders (75%), while Vietnamese Americans (32%) have the lowest share. 

The percentage of college degree holders is even lower for groups like Laotian (18%) or Bhutanese Americans (15%), a 2023 Pew survey found.

“Centuries of systemic and structural inequity have resulted in significant disparities in access to quality education and opportunities,” National Korean American Service and Education Consortium Director of Communications and Special Initiatives Rachel Koelzer said in a statement to The Yappie. “Affirmative action and race-conscious admissions acknowledge these historic and present truths and seek to rectify them by considering race as one factor among many.”

“When so much of the narrative around affirmative action seems to be East Asian and as if Asian communities in mass are asking for race conscious admissions to end, it pits our communities against one another,” added Owoimaha-Church, who noted that race-conscious admissions policies gave her a chance at higher education despite not having academic resources like college counseling. “It's important that we are working and moving in solidarity alongside one another.”

He told The Yappie’s Sonia Prasad that the universities’ responses indicated a lump sum categorization of international Asians and domestic Asian Americans—a non-answer that prompted Wang to file complaints with the Department of Education.

Wang noted, however, that he doesn’t favor dismantling affirmative action entirely and instead supports “reforming” race-based policies to give economic background more weight.

“Economic-based affirmative action makes the most sense,” he said. “I don’t know how you could possibly include Southeast Asians, Pacific Islanders, East Asians [in one category]. You’re putting … people with vast different experiences and vast different economic situations [together].”

“How they’re explaining that is a lack of ability when, in reality, that correlates to a lack of opportunity,” Tatum said.

Data points, like lower racial diversity in California and Michigan school systems after state-level affirmative action bans, indicate that class-based admissions policies would fail to achieve current levels of racial diversity at many schools, he noted.

Tatum also pointed out that “misinformation, particularly from larger media narratives,” has presented obstacles for coalition-building. “What I would like to do is to correct these narratives, particularly around a lack of cross-racial solidarity … to impact advocacy efforts in the future,” he added.

"As a Muslim young girl of color here in the Chicago area, race was a part of my reality. It led to police stops that shouldn’t have ever happened; it led to family members facing problems at airports; and led to what I saw around me, which was dramatic residential segregation and different opportunities for people of color than for white people,” Choudhury said in a virtual ACLU event in 2021.

The former ACLU attorney will serve on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. 

“I’ll do everything I can to ensure that everyone who comes before the court gets a fair shake, a fair opportunity to be heard, and ultimately equal treatment under the law,” Ho told Roll Call’s Ryan Tarinelli.

“Asians have been targeted because there is a perception. There is a perception we do not call the police. There is a perception we will not work with the government. There is a perception that we are weak. That we do not speak up and stand up and honestly that needs to change and we need to change that perception,” Sacramento District Attorney Thien Ho told ABC 10’s Gurajpal Sangha.

A recurring theme: About a third of Asian adults have altered their daily routine due to worries of threats or attacks, Pew Research Center’s Mark Lopez finds. In addition, more Asian American adults give their local officials a bad rating than a good one when it comes to addressing violence against Asian Americans.