- Tuesday, a federal judge in Boston ruled that Harvard did not discriminate against Asian Americans in its admissions process.
- Judge Allison Burroughs said that while Harvard’s admissions process is flawed, it is a “very fine” system, with Burroughs also concluding that race-neutral alternatives are not sufficient.
- Students For Fair Admissions is expected to appeal the decision to the 1st Court of Appeals and potentially the United States Supreme Court, according to its president, Edward Blum.
- The case has been carefully watched as a potential landmark trial on whether the United States still needs affirmative action.
Judge Rules in Favor of Harvard
A federal judge ruled in favor of Harvard in a 2014 lawsuit that alleged the university had engaged in admissions practices that discriminated against Asian American applicants.
In her Tuesday ruling against the Students For Fair Admissions, Judge Allison Burroughs said, “the Court finds no persuasive documentary evidence of any racial animus or conscious prejudice against Asian Americans.”
Burroughs concluded Harvard had only ever used race as a “plus” factor, writing in her 130-page decision that the university only used race to help students rather than hurt them.
She also said the university shows commitment to recruiting students “who are exceptional across multiple dimensions.”
“The court will not dismantle a very fine admissions program that passes constitutional muster, solely because it could do better,” she said.
Perhaps the biggest conclusion Burroughs reached was that race-neutral alternatives are not sufficient. In fact, she says race-conscious admissions are needed to ensure diversity at Harvard.
She rejected ideas like Harvard admitting every applicant with a perfect GPA, saying the university would have to expand its freshman class by 400 percent each year then reject every student without a perfect GPA regardless of their athletic, extracurricular, or other academic achievements, or life experiences.
Additionally, Burroughs was skeptical of other ideas such as the SFFA’s proposal to have Harvard consider socioeconomic status instead of race. In her decision, she said she feared such a process would not truly be race-neutral.
Harvard’s attorney, William Lee, called the decision “a significant victory not merely for Harvard, but also for all schools and students, for diversity, and for the rule of law. As the court has recognized, now is not the time to turn back the clock on diversity and opportunity.”
What Was in the Lawsuit?
The SFFA primarily accused Harvard of implementing racial balancing techniques in the university’s admissions process, essentially claiming that Harvard set a quota for different minorities in the makeup of its incoming classes.
The SFFA then alleged Asian American students were being forced to meet higher standards, saying Asian American students were consistently performing better academically than other minority races.
It looked to support those claims by providing evidence that the percentage of admitted students from different racial groups was about the same each year, that being 20 percent Asian American, 15 percent African American, 12 percent Latino, and roughly 50 percent caucasian.
In addition to racial balancing, the SFFA accused university admissions officers of promoting racial stereotypes against Asian Americans. That argument boiled down to the university’s personal rating system, which includes aspects like the applicant’s background and their character.
There, the SFFA alleged that admissions officers used stereotypical language describing them as “quiet,” “bland,” or “not exciting.”
Burroughs also addressed this concern in her decision, finding that while officers had described some Asian applicants as “quiet,” “shy,” or “understated,” that language was also used on a significant portion of other students of various racial identities.
While the lawsuit was open, Harvard defended itself by saying while it took race into account, race was only one of about 200 other factors. Some of those other factors include class year, gender, SAT/ACT scores, GPA, as well as intended career and whether or not an applicant’s parents went to an Ivy League school.
What Happens Next?
SFFA President Edward Blum has said he will appeal the case in the 1st Court of Appeals, and if necessary, he would appeal the case to the United States Supreme Court.
The lawsuit represents what could potentially be a pivotal case in the polarizing topic of affirmative action and whether it is still relevant in the U.S. today.
Though the SFFA waits to see if their case is successfully appealed, the lawsuit did pressure Harvard to enact some changes to its admissions process.
Chiefly, the university has directed its admissions officers to “not take an applicant’s race or ethnicity into account in making any of the ratings other than the overall rating.”
It has also changed its personal rating criteria, with officers now being asked to consider “qualities of character.” Some of those include “genuineness,” “selflessness,” “humility,” “spirit and camaraderie with peers,” “courage in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles,” “leadership,” “maturity,” and “resiliency.”
See what others are saying: (BBC) (CNN) (New York Times)
Privacy Concerns Rise in Florida Over Menstruation Questions on Digital Student-Athlete Physicals
Ever since the overturn of Roe V. Wade, activists have been concerned about how period tracking data can be used against women.
Outrage and Concerns
Florida schools require student-athletes to complete an annual physical evaluation form before being allowed to participate in sports, including questions about female menstruation. Recently, school districts have shifted these forms into a digital format using a third party, causing privacy concerns for parents and activists alike.
As headlines started to circulate the news, many online began expressing outrage. Lawyer Pam Keith, who ran for U.S. House of Representatives in 2020 referred to Florida as a “police state for women” on Tuesday morning. Other tweets have called this practice “dystopian” and “tramping on women’s rights.”
In Florida, these questions have been on the student-athlete physical evaluation form for approximately 20 years. Now that some school districts have shifted from paper copies to digital formatting with the third-party software company, Aktivate, criticisms have resurfaced across the state. Abortion rights activists, in particular, are worried about menstrual information being used to prosecute someone for getting an abortion. Others vocally oppose storing this information online, citing parents’ rights over their children’s data.
These questions relating to menstruation are labeled as optional on the document. However, some have expressed concern that athletes will feel obligated to answer them in order to ensure their eligibility to play.
Florida schools have all of the medical data collected by these physicals sent back to the district from the physician. This is in sharp contrast to the policy of other states that simply require the physician’s approval for the athlete to be cleared to play.
“I don’t see why school districts need that access to that type of information,” pediatrician Dr. Michael Haller said to The Florida Times-Union. “It sure as hell will give me pause to fill it out with my kid.”
See what others are saying: (Forbes) (The Palm Beach Post) (The Florida Times-Union)
Navy SEAL Recruits Sprayed With Tear Gas in “Horrific” Leaked Video
The revelation comes after the Navy launched an investigation into SEAL training practices last month in response to the death of a recruit.
The Worst Birthday Ever
In September 2021, Navy SEAL recruits were forced to sing “happy birthday” while standing amid a thick cloud of tear gas as part of their training, a leaked video reveals.
The footage, which was obtained by investigative reporter Mathew Cole and published by CBS News, comes from California’s San Clemente Island, where SEALs are trained.
For over a minute, instructors are seen dousing the recruits in the chemical, sometimes from just inches away, as they struggle to sing. Reports say they were singing so that they could not hold their breath, which regulations incidentally warn may cause a person to pass out.
Although exposure to tear gas is a common right of passage for military recruits, who must learn how to properly don a face mask, it is meant to be sprayed from six feet away to prevent burns and last for no longer than 15 seconds.
The recruits in the video are seen coughing, heaving, and crying out in agony after the gas subsides, and one appears to pass out.
A Navy admiral has reportedly launched an investigation into the video to determine whether the instructors sprayed the gas for too long and from too close, and if they did, whether they were simply unaware of the proper procedure or intended to abuse and punish the recruits, which could be a criminal offense.
Cole wrote in a Twitter thread that he showed the footage to current and retired senior SEAL officers, who described the exercise as “horrific,” “abusive,” “pointless” and “near torture.”
“Current and former SEAL students say they were told the purpose of the exercise, which cause extreme pain, was to simulate how they would react to bullet wounds in combat,” he said. “They were told by BUD/S instructors it was a ‘rite of passage’ and given three attempts to complete it.”
The Death of Kyle Mullen
“The source who provided the video did so because they wanted the Navy, Congress and the public to know that the February 2022 death of Kyle Mullen was not an isolated incident,” Cole Continued.
Mullen was a 24-year-old Navy recruit who arrived in California for the SEALs rigorous selection course in January. In his third week, he reached what’s known as Hell Week, a five-day-long slog through an infamously brutal training regiment that’s killed at least 11 men since 1953.
Trainees spend at least 20 hours per day doing physical exercises, running a total of more than 200 miles, and are allowed just four hours of sleep across the entire week.
Hell Week is meant to test a recruit’s mental and physical resilience, as well as their commitment to becoming a Navy SEAL. Critics, however, argue it is excessively harsh, pointing to the concussions, broken bones, dangerous infections, and near drownings suffered by some recruits.
When Mullen completed Hell Week, he called his mother Regina, who told CBS News her son seemed to be having trouble breathing.
A few hours later, he died with the official cause being pneumonia, which Regina attributed to the freezing water he was submerged in during training.
She also said he admitted to using banned performance-enhancing drugs, something many aspiring SEALs resort to so they can cross the finish line.
Even with drugs, however, around 90% of trainees fail to complete the selection course, with most dropping out during Hell Week.
The same day Kyle died, one of his fellow trainees had to be intubated, and two more were hospitalized.
The Navy launched an investigation into the SEALs selection course last month in response to Kyle’s death.
See what others are saying: (CBS) (NBC) (The New York Times)
Lawyer Claims That LAPD Officer Who Died In Training Was Targeted For Investigating Other Officers For Rape
The late officer’s family has filed a lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles.
Press Conference Reveals New Allegations
A lawyer for the family of Los Angeles Police officer Houston Tipping, who died in May during a training exercise, claimed on Monday that Tipping was targeted for reporting an alleged sexual assault by four other police officers last year.
In May, Tipping sustained serious injury — including a broken spine — during training, which resulted in his death three days later. The LAPD released a statement saying his injuries came from a fall taken during a segment of training that involved grappling another officer.
His family, however, filed a complaint — and later a lawsuit — against the city of Los Angeles. The lawsuit states that Tipping was, “repeatedly struck in the head severely enough that he bled.”
During a Monday press conference, his family’s lawyer, Bradley Gage, claimed that the injuries Tipping sustained could not have been the result of grappling.
“There is no way grappling would have caused those kinds of injuries the way the LAPD portrays it,” he said. “What would cause those injuries is if somebody picked a person up, slams them down onto their head and their neck onto a hard surface.”
An Alleged Cover-Up
According to Gage, an officer that Tipping had reported last year for an alleged sexual assault was also present at this training exercise.
“The allegation is that in July of 2021, four police officers were involved in the sexual assault of a woman from the Los Angeles area. A report was taken by Officer Tipping,” he said. “And the female victim claimed that she was raped by four different people, all LAPD officers. She knew the names of some of those officers because they were in uniform and had their name tags on. The name of one of those officers, with the name tag, seems to correlate with the names of one of the officers that was at the bicycle training”
The attorney went on to confirm that he is alleging this unnamed officer is responsible for Tipping’s injuries.
Later in the press conference, Gage stated that the police department is likely trying to cover-up these misdeeds.
“I’m sure that these actions are being covered-up. The thought of a code of silence or a cover-up by a police department should not be shocking or surprising to anyone,” he said.
Although the initial lawsuit by Tipping’s family included the wrongful death and other civil rights violations, with this new information, the family and the attorney has decided to file a supplemental. This supplemental will cover the whistler blower retaliation, destruction of evidence, and the initial wrongdoing of the rape case.