The Equal Protection Project filed Civil Rights Complaints against five universities regarding scholarships offered ONLY to DACA/”Undocumented” students. These scholarships exclude American-born students. That’s national origin discrimination in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
The Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education agreed with us, and opened an investigation into these programs with a press release that set off a media firestorm. We covered it all in Dept. Education Investigates Discrimination Against American-Born Students After Equal Protection Project Complaints.
The Editorial Boards of The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal each issued Editorials criticising in fairly harsh terms our complaints and the OCR investigations. But it turns out neither Editorial Board actually understood the cases.
Our complaints did not assert, nor did OCR, that DACA or “undocumented” students could not apply for scholarships. We only challenged whether it was lawful for universities to exclude American-born students. Anyone who read our complaints or the OCR press release would understand that distinction.
Instead, both WaPo and WSJ asserted that we didn’t want DACA or “Undocumented” students to get the money to go to school, and we were cruel, etc. Whether or not such students should be able to apply for scholarships is a policy matter that was not implicated by our complaints or OCR action. We take no position on that policy because at EPP we only legally challenge scholarships we believe violate the law, regardless of policy preferences.
It really wasn’t that complicated a point, so I had to set the record straight in Letters to the Editor.
Here’s my Letter to the Editor of Wapo:
An off base characterizationThe argument in the Aug. 11 online editorial, “Helping undocumented students afford college isn’t discrimination,” that a national origin discrimination investigation initiated by the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights against five universities “is as absurd as it is cruel,” which infers that it deprives Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) students of the opportunity to become “nurses, lawyers, doctors, teachers — and taxpayers” was off base.The nonprofit organization I run, the Legal Insurrection Foundation’s Equal Protection Project, filed the five complaints that gave rise to the OCR investigation. The editorial mischaracterized the basis on which the scholarships were challenged.The exclusion of American-born students, not the inclusion of DACA and “undocumented” students, was the basis for our legal complaints. We took issue only with the scholarships that were open exclusively to DACA and “undocumented” students. Since only students born abroad could qualify for DACA or be “undocumented,” the scholarships necessarily excluded American-born students of every race and ethnicity.The editorial portrayed our effort as “absurd” because other scholarships, such as those for international students, have not been investigated by OCR, and it said the complaints were “cruel” because aid to DACA students constitutes only “a tiny drop in the bucket” of aid doled out by these schools.If other scholarships also constitute national-origin discrimination, that does not absolve these universities for excluding American-born students from the challenged scholarships. Importantly, we do not accept that even a minor violation of the Civil Rights Act is tolerable.To protect the civil liberties of American-born students of all races and ethnicities, OCR should investigate whether their exclusion was a violation of the Civil Rights Act.William A. Jacobson, Barrington, Rhode IslandThe writer is founder and president of the Legal Insurrection Foundation and its Equal Protection Project.
Here’s my Letter to the Editor of The Wall Street Journal:
Why the DACA Scholarships Deserve Scrutiny
In “Discriminating Against DACA Students” (Review & Outlook, Aug. 5), you argue that the Education Department’s national-origin discrimination investigations into five universities deprives “Dreamers an opportunity to learn and advance in society.” You add that the government is “needlessly harassing colleges that provide scholarships to young people who came to the country illegally as children.” That misunderstands the department’s action.My nonprofit, the Legal Insurrection Foundation’s Equal Protection Project, filed the five complaints that gave rise to the Office of Civil Right’s investigations. We didn’t challenge whether DACA students could participate in scholarships—we only opposed scholarships that were exclusively open to DACA and “undocumented” students. Since only those born abroad could qualify for DACA or be “undocumented,” the scholarships excluded American-born students of all races and ethnicities.There is nothing in our complaints or in the OCR announcement that suggests that “the feds claim schools can’t offer scholarships to the Dreamers.” It was the exclusion of American-born students—not the inclusion of DACA or “undocumented” students—that constituted the alleged national origin discrimination on which OCR rightly opened an investigation.You add that “some schools also offer special scholarships for international students, though the Education Department doesn’t seem to have a problem with these programs.” Yet whether some scholarships also constitute national origin discrimination doesn’t absolve these universities for excluding America-born students from the challenged scholarships.William A. JacobsonEqual Protection Project
The New York Times called me for comment (neither WaPo nor WSJ did that), and I was able to explain the distinction to the reporter. At least so far, no NY Times editorial on it.
Why the hypersentitivity to DACA/”Undocumented” scholarships? While we get criticism for our other challenges (over 110 schools and over 500 scholarships/programs), we don’t get such angry editorials from major publications. When we challenge a scholarship, for example, open only to “students of color” on the ground it is discriminatory, no publications assert we don’t want “students of color” to get an education, they understand we are saying you can’t exclude others. They may disagree as a matter of policy, but they don’t misunderstand our legal claims.
But for DACA/Undocumented it seems different. I think that’s a reflection of how hot-button an issue illegal immigration is, and how even our good intentions — to treat American-born students equally — are attacked from a political not a legal perspective.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY