By Zijing Fu
Supporters from both sides of the Harvard racial discrimination trial filled the courtroom an hour before the judge walked in. Expecting large crowds, the court had two extra rooms with live streaming of trial. Meanwhile, about a dozen protesters gathered outside the courthouse in support of the student group accusing Harvard of discriminating against Asian Americans.
Students for Fair Admissions, a nonprofit group that believes “racial classifications and preferences in college admissions are unfair, unnecessary, and unconstitutional,” is suing Harvard for racial discrimination, alleging it is holding Asian Americans to a higher standard.
The lawsuit alleges Harvard intentionally discriminates against Asian American applicants even when they score high in both academics and extracurriculars by giving them low scores on what they call a “Personal Rating.”
In the personal rating, which assesses an applicant’s personal qualities, a 1 is defined as “outstanding,” while a 4 indicates “bland or somewhat negative or immature,” according to Wall Street Journal.
During the first day of the trial, both sides gave opening statements. The attorney for Students for Fair Admissions pointed to Harvard’s guidance for admission officers, which was no more than a few lines saying to give personal rating scores for applicants — with 1 being the highest for outstanding personality and 5 being the lowest for questionable personal traits.
In his opening statement, Harvard’s attorney, William Lee, who graduated from the university in 1972, said the personal rating system is much more sophisticated than an admissions employee simply choosing a number 1 through 5.
According to The Harvard Crimson, Lee is the first Asian American to lead one of the nation's foremost law firms and to gain a seat on the Harvard Corporation, where he now serves as a senior fellow.
During his opening statement, Lee said Harvard’s admission process is handled with fairness and delicacy. A full committee of 40 members reviews applicants collectively before voting to confirm or deny, he said. All new admissions officers are given updated handbooks and casebooks on how to evaluate applicants, he said, and they also are paired with a senior admissions officer for their first 50 to 100 cases before they can review them independently.
“They don’t try to keep people out,” Lee said. “They try to get people in.”
But the student group pointed to analysis from Harvard’s own Office of Institutional Research, which it said shows Harvard unlawfully discriminates against Asian American students.
According to The Harvard Crimson, a 2013 report from OIR said “Asian high achievers have lower rates of admission.”
Harvard’s lawyer said that was “simply implausible.” He said paying some attention to race during the admissions process is endorsed by the United States Supreme Court.
Just before the trial opened, protesters from Chinese Americans Association, a group based in Massachusetts, with members all over the country, gathered with signs at the entrance to the courthouse.
They held signs saying “My race should not hurt me in admissions” and “I am Asian American. I have a dream too.”
The group of protesters came from all over the country, including San Francisco and Florida.
Jessica Zhang, spokesperson for the group, said she thinks both sides want to take this lawsuit to the Supreme Court.
“It is important for mainstream media in America to pay attention to the facts of this case,” she said.
After the hearing was over, several #DefendDiversity supporters — who want race to be included as part of admissions decisions — gathered outside the courtroom a few feet away from the protesters who are concerned that including race is hurting Asian Americans.
Benjamin Yu, a volunteer of The Orange Club, flew from Orange County, California to Boston for “this historical moment.” Yu said this is a cause for the greater good.
When the court took a break for lunch, Jin Hee Lee, deputy director of litigation at the NAACP, talked to Television reporters as protesters gathered to stand in the background.
“This is something for all students, Asian American students, white students and students of color,” she said. “The quality of their education will be diminished by preventing Harvard from achieving the racial and ethnic diversity that it wants to achieve.”
Ellen Lee Zhou, a seamstress who is running for mayor of San Francisco, was one of the protesters standing outside of the courthouse. She said she thinks it is unfair that certain people such as athletes and children of faculty get special treatment.
“I might even be able to get in if I had a reference,” she said. “They don’t look at your scores when you are being referred by somebody important.”
Not everybody was happy with the testimony, Yukong Zhao, President of the AACE (Asian American Coalition for Education) said after the trial, “It is total hypocrisy for Harvard to say the OIR reports are not reliable. ”
Juliet, a Harvard University freshman who refused to give her last name, speaks to Chinese American Association protestors outside of courthouse.
Jennifer Holmes, assistant counsel for the NAACP, said she thinks the lawsuit is a front for SFFA and Edward Blum to ultimately dismantle Affirmative Action.
“I’m not saying that everything that Harvard does is absolutely OK, if there is possible discrimination, we should look into it,” she said. “But we all know what the goal of SFFA is in this lawsuit, and is not to vindicate the rights of Asian Americans.”