Asian Americans Ask What Happens Next After Affirmative Action Ruling
Asian Americans Ask What Happens Next After Affirmative Action Ruling
Kawsar Yasin, a student at Harvard who is of Uyghur origin, felt the decision made by the Supreme Court last week to restrict the use of race as a factor in college admissions to be “gut-wrenching.”
Jayson Lee, who is currently a sophomore in high school and is of Taiwanese origin, has great expectations that the ruling of the court would make it possible for him and others to attend competitive institutions.
And Divya Tulsiani, who is the daughter of Indian immigrants, can’t help but worry that the ruling won’t put a stop to the toxic aspect of the college admissions process.
The Supreme Court‘s decision to rule against Harvard and the University of North Carolina focused mostly on Asian Americans as its primary focus. Plaintiffs in both suits alleged that academically educated Asian Americans with high levels of achievement were passed over for jobs in favour of pupils with lower levels of academic preparation. According to the lawsuit, Asian Americans applying to Harvard were given a lower personal rating than other applicants, which sparked an uncomfortable dialogue about the role of racial stereotyping in admissions.
However, in the days that followed the court’s verdict, interviews with around two dozen Asian American students indicated that for the majority of them — regardless of their opinions on affirmative action — the decision was unlikely to alleviate misgivings about the fairness of college admissions. This was the case despite the fact that the court’s order upheld the use of racial preferences in college applications.
Ms. Tulsiani stated, “I don’t think this decision brought any kind of equalising of a playing field,” and she is correct in her assessment. “In a way, it had the opposite effect.”
Lower courts came to the conclusion that both Harvard and UNC did not engage in discriminatory admissions practises. although, the Supreme Court decided that, “however well intentioned and implemented in good faith,” the admission practises of the universities did not pass constitutional scrutiny, and that race could no longer be used when determining which students to admit. This meant that institutions could no longer admit students based on their race.
The court made notice of the fact that the two colleges’ primary reaction to criticism over their admissions procedures was “essentially, ‘trust us.'”
The universities have indicated that they intend to adhere to the verdict. In addition, Harvard emphasised that the institution “must always be a place of opportunity, a place whose doors remain open to those to whom they had long been closed.”
In a population that was both as broad and as varied as the Asian American community, there was a wide range of ideas regarding affirmative action. The ambivalence of Asian Americans was highlighted in a recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Centre. About half of Asian Americans who were aware of affirmative action thought it was a positive thing; yet, the majority of Asian respondents said that race and ethnicity should not play a role in determining college admissions.
A couple of the kids took heart from the verdict made by the Supreme Court.
Mr. Lee, a sophomore at the University of Maryland, is enthusiastic about the study of science and technology, and he is in favour of standardised examinations and other traditional indicators of academic achievement.
“Before the case, yes, I did have worries about my ethnicity being a factor in college admissions,” he said. “Yes, I did have worries about my ethnicity being a factor in the case.” In contrast, “but if colleges implement the new court rulings to get rid of affirmative action, then I think that it will be better, and more even, for every ethnicity,” the author argues.
Others were more conflicted in their emotions. Jacqueline Kwun, a sophomore at a public high school in Marietta, Georgia, whose parents moved from South Korea, claimed that she had felt the sting of stereotyping, when others thought that she was “born smart.” Her parents emigrated to the United States in the 1980s.
Despite this, she stated that she was of the opinion that the judge’s decision was incorrect.
She questioned her understanding by asking, “Why would you stop everything?” You shouldn’t settle for a situation in which you either win or lose; rather, you should work towards creating win-win circumstances wherever possible. “You should try to find a way to make yourself happy and make other people happy at the same time,” the saying goes.
The Chief Justice of the United States, John G. Roberts Jr., said in the majority opinion that universities might examine references of race in the essays that applicants submit with their applications if they could be related to, for example, overcoming prejudice via personal traits such as “courage and determination.” The majority judgement was written by Chief Justice Roberts Jr. However, a significant number of Asian American students had reservations about following that recommendation.
According to Rushil Umaretiya, who will attend the University of North Carolina in the upcoming academic year, students already feel pressured to write about difficult experiences. In his article, he described how the women in his Indian immigrant family were the breadwinners and intellectuals, as well as how his grandmother ascended through the ranks of the Roy Rogers restaurant chain, which was dominated by white males, to become a regional manager. He also mentioned how his family was a part of the Indian diaspora.
Even before the decision was made, he had witnessed worried students at the Thomas Jefferson High School in Alexandria, Virginia, where he attended the exclusive high school, make up stories about having to face racial injustice.
“I think college admissions has really dipped into this fad of trauma dumping,” he added. “I think it’s happening more and more.”Ms. Tulsiani, who is currently attending New York University in pursuit of a master’s degree in sociology and law, is a seasoned expert when it comes to the application process.
In answer to a question on diversity, she produced an essay for her Georgetown application in which she discussed her family and how her father had worked his way up from being a deli worker and cab driver to eventually owning restaurants.
She said that in order to pique the interest of this audience, one must come to terms with the fact that they must sell some sort of tale.
She was relieved that the court had decided to keep the diversity essay as an option, but she did feel sorry for the candidates who were required to reveal their deepest, darkest secrets and speak with moral conviction. She said that “it’s a huge burden on a 17-year-old child,” which is exactly what she meant.
She is of the opinion that the negative connotations associated with affirmative action will endure. She said that the story would be told such that, rather of saying, “you got in because of affirmative action,” it would say, “you must have gotten in because of your class.”
