Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Yale Sued by DOJ Over Discriminatory Admissions Policies Against “Asian and White Applicants”

Yale Sued by DOJ Over Discriminatory Admissions Policies Against “Asian and White Applicants”

“Yale’s discrimination imposes undue and unlawful penalties on racially-disfavored applicants, including in particular most Asian and White applicants”

Yale University is under fire from the Department of Justice over admissions policies the DOJ says are racist against Asian-Americans and whites.

Given this lawsuit and the Department of Education’s investigation of Princeton, it’s obvious that the federal government is taking a much more active interest in higher education.

From the FOX Business Network:

Justice department sues Yale University over admissions practices

The Justice Department filed a lawsuit Thursday against Yale University, alleging the school violated federal civil-rights law by discriminating against Asian-American and White applicants in undergraduate admissions.

In the complaint, filed in federal district court in Connecticut, the Justice Department alleged that for the past few decades Yale’s “oversized, standardless, intentional use of race has subjected domestic, non-transfer applicants to Yale College to discrimination on the ground of race.”

The lawsuit marks an escalation of the Trump administration’s scrutiny of elite colleges over their policies on race and admissions. The Justice Department has also supported legal efforts to end affirmative action at Harvard University, and the Education Department last month said it would investigate racism at Princeton University.

Yale didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the lawsuit.

CBS News reports that this scrutiny has not been limited to Yale:

Yale had denied the allegations, calling them “meritless” and “hasty.”

The action from the Justice Department is the latest by the Trump administration in a long-running effort aimed at rooting out discrimination in the college application process, following complaints from students about the application process at some Ivy League colleges.

The Justice Department’s investigation — which stemmed from a 2016 complaint against Yale, Brown and Dartmouth — also found that Yale uses race as a factor in multiple steps of the admissions process and that Yale “racially balances its classes,” officials said.

The DOJ Press Release state:

The Justice Department today filed suit against Yale University for race and national origin discrimination. The complaint alleges that Yale discriminated against applicants to Yale College on the grounds of race and national origin, and that Yale’s discrimination imposes undue and unlawful penalties on racially-disfavored applicants, including in particular most Asian and White applicants.

The complaint also alleges that Yale injures applicants and students because Yale’s race discrimination relies upon and reinforces damaging race-based stereotypes, including in particular such stereotypes against Yale’s racially-favored applicants. And, the complaint alleges that Yale engages in racial balancing by, among other things, keeping the annual percentage of African-American admitted applicants to within one percentage point of the previous year’s admitted class as reflected in U.S. Department of Education data. The complaint alleges similar racial balancing about Asian-American applicants.

The department’s complaint alleges that Yale’s race and national origin discrimination violate Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The lawsuit is the result of a multi-year investigation into allegations of illegal discrimination contained in a complaint filed by Asian American groups concerning Yale’s conduct.

You can read the Complaint here.

The focus on Yale admissions got started back in August. At the time, Professor Jacobson noted:

We constantly hear that there is systemic racism in higher education. That’s true, except not in the way propagandized.

The last existing systemic racism in higher ed takes place in the admissions process at elite institutions, in order to achieve a racial mix preferred by administrators and activists. The primary victims of such practices are people of Asian descent.

We saw this in the recent Harvard trial, which is now up on appeal (oral argument scheduled September 16, 2020). Harvard’s primary defense was not that it didn’t discriminate against Asians, which was statistically irrefutable, but that such discrimination was legally permitted as part of a larger educational goal of “diversity.” Harvard drove its discriminatory truck through a small opening the U.S. Supreme Court has created that permits race to be considered in admissions so long as it is just one of many factors and not tantamount to a quota system.

The U.S. Department of Justice sided with the Asian-American plaintiffs in the Harvard case. Harvard prevailed at trial based on fuzzy explanations about a wholistic admissions process. That harkens back to the wholistic approach pionered by Harvard a century ago to limit the number of Jews. I’d be surprised if the Harvard case didn’t eventually end up at the Supreme Court.

The Justice Department now is focusing on Yale University, issuing a finding that Yale Illegally Discriminates Against Asians and Whites in Undergraduate Admissions in Violation of Federal Civil-Rights Laws:

The Department of Justice today notified Yale University of its findings that Yale illegally discriminates against Asian American and white applicants in its undergraduate admissions process in violation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The findings are the result of a two-year investigation in response to a complaint by Asian American groups concerning Yale’s conduct.

“There is no such thing as a nice form of race discrimination,” said Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband for the Civil Rights Division. “Unlawfully dividing Americans into racial and ethnic blocs fosters stereotypes, bitterness, and division. It is past time for American institutions to recognize that all people should be treated with decency and respect and without unlawful regard to the color of their skin.

It’ll be fascinating to see what comes of the case against Yale.

Surely, they believe they’re far too woke to be at fault.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


2smartforlibs | October 10, 2020 at 2:22 pm

Since the 1960s we called that Affirmative action and quotas. The proper name was soft bigotry.

As an alumnus of the university that Yale used to be, I couldn’t be more pleased at the fix it is in.

Looks like Yale is in for an intense stampy-footed finger wagging from the DOJ. Barr isn’t kidding… this time.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Pasadena Phil. | October 10, 2020 at 5:07 pm

    Just wait. There will be a Sternly Worded Letter as well.

      Well Princeton just got a letter that in effect told them to put up or shut up regarding their virtue signaling about being a racist institution that actively oppressed and discriminates despite the University claiming that it most certainly does not when filing compliance paperwork.

      So yeah Yale will get a similar letter. Hopefully stapled to a subpoena.

The Friendly Grizzly | October 10, 2020 at 3:30 pm

But, I thought the 1964 Civil Rights Act stopped discrimination!

JusticeDelivered | October 10, 2020 at 4:06 pm

I bet this shift to discrimination against white and Asians is a direct result of a bunch of Affirmative hires into administration of Yale. Most are classic examples of the Peter Principle.

The way to fix this is to test all staff for competency, and dismiss all who are found wanting.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to JusticeDelivered. | October 10, 2020 at 5:13 pm

    “The way to fix this is to test all staff for competency, and dismiss all who are found wanting.”

    It would take only seconds for the cries of racism. Seconds more for the administrators to walk it back.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to JusticeDelivered. | October 10, 2020 at 5:59 pm

    Kamala fits that Peter Principle perfectly.

    Let them test for competency across the Ivy League, please!

    That would make my work and life a lot easier.

    CommoChief in reply to JusticeDelivered. | October 11, 2020 at 1:07 am

    Well competency for some of these staff positions may be an elusive definition. May I suggest instead a new staffing model?

    If you don’t teach and don’t cut the grass or mop the floors or prepare food then unless your title is Dean or Provost or Chancellor then you and your position are excess to need. You are fired.

      Who is going to maintain the library or school servers and general computer maintenance, school facility maintenance as well?
      And are you going to outsource the school bookstore?

        CommoChief in reply to jhn1. | October 11, 2020 at 10:16 am

        Ok the librarian and the handyman can stay as well. They can take their chances with gmail and the geek squad like everyone else.

        No nerds. There was a great deal of research culminating in a series of documentary films which made clear the danger nerds present to campus.

The DOJ should look at the US Govs own procurement requirements. Read earlier they were investigating MSFT for their hiring process (which is puts every black candidate at the top of the pile)… MSFT’s procurement is equally driven with race data, but the factor there was being able to bid on government jobs.

years ago a sibling of mine applied to a lawschool that’s considered rather prestigious in our part of the world–she’d graduated summa cum laude with an mba from a very good private university in georgia–scored in the 98th percentile on lsat and was denied admission to this particular lawschool–both my parents were alums from this university(each with graduate degrees) and had long supported their alma mater–at a social gathering in the midst of this, the dean of the lawschool, standing next to me and across the bar from my father, looked my dad in the face and said ” doctor, i’m sorry. there’s nothing i can do. if she were black, i’d HAVE to admit her, but she’s not. ”

he was dead serious–lord–all i could do to keep from hitting him right then, instead had to turn and walk away–to dishonor my parents like that was one thing but to dishonor my sibling, a young woman of impeccable character and significant intelligence, was despicable

that was my introduction to affirmative action/quotas in higher education–didn’t believe in it then, don’t believe in it now

    I hope your sibling came out OK from this dreadful experience.

    My young granddaughter has perhaps the mildest case of spina bifida one could have. After 3 spinal surgeries at 6 months, she appears to be left with only possibly lifelong neurogenic urinary problems requiring catheterizing. Otherwise, she can run, jump, play like any other child. Because of her condition, she is registered as disabled by our state. In this crazy world, I was not entirely joking when I told our daughter that she might have the best chance of getting into Harvard of anyone in our family.

Affirmative action is grossly unconstitutional and is also a violation of several parts of the federal civil rights code. And, it has been upheld based upon “Bong” logic that allows the Constitution to be violated to supposedly correct past wrongs against a class of people, none of whom can be shown to have suffered the “wrong” being corrected. It is judicial fiction. The same is true of the equally flawed logic in Roe v Wade. There is no right to absolute privacy which allows for the lawful termination of human life anywhere in the Constitution. Termination of human life, without substantive due process, is a common law criminal offense, with certain well established common law exceptions, such as self defense. It is about time that these faulty practices are rescinded.

Diversity, a color judgment, denial of individual dignity, denial of individual conscience, denial of intrinsic value, normalization of color blocs, color quotas, and affirmative discrimination, a Progressive dogma of the Pro-Choice Church, not limited to racism, breeds adversity.

‘Yale “racially balances its classes,” officials said.’

It would be one thing if the acceptance ratio is proportional to the actual populations–that would be fine.

But it is no–and and therefore it is not.

“Yale: Combating racism with different racism”… not sure their new school motto is all that catchy.

Since Yale chose to engage in clear and obvious discrimination with purity of heart and good intentions because their racism comes from a place of love that makes it ok?

This is what actual racism looks like.