By Maya Shah, Co-T/E Life Editor

With the recent decision in the U.S. Supreme Court case Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, affirmative action has officially been declared unconstitutional, opening the door to a nationwide discussion about the role of race-based admissions in higher education. While the conversation often centers around the experiences of Black and Hispanic students, the case made by Students for Fair Admissions focused on the disadvantages faced by Asian Americans. Ultimately, although a difficult one, the decision made by the court more fairly represents the experiences of all students.

Research has long shown that in elevating certain minorities such as Black and Hispanic people, affirmative action also handicaps Asian Americans, another minority group. Princeton University conducted a study that indicated Asian Americans needed to score 450 points higher than Black students to have the same chance of admissions at private universities. When compared even with white students, Asian Americans maintained a significant disadvantage. A National Bureau of Economic Research study found that Asian Americans were 28% less likely to be admitted to selective institutions than their white counterparts who maintained similar test scores, grades and extracurricular activities.

At Harvard specifically, this impediment manifested in a less explicit way. Despite having higher grades and test scores than their competitors, Asian American Harvard applicants were consistently ranked lower on Harvard’s personal ratings, gathered largely through interviews and essays which sought to quantify things like personality, likeability and kindness.

Disadvantaging Asian American students on the premise of race, even if unintentionally, is the exact circumstance affirmative action was put in place to counter. The official policy was always meant to be a temporary solution, as stated by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 2003 decision Grutter vs. Bollinger, which permitted the use of race-based admissions in higher education. While the concept arose in the 1960s as a form of reparations for antebellum era legislation barring minorities from higher education, universities now use it as a means to promote a generally diverse student body. While this may be a noble cause, there are better ways to ensure no student is at a disadvantage.

A commonly-proposed solution is more heavily considering socioeconomic status in college applicatioins. Besides the appeal of this plan — 61% of Americans support the consideration of familial economic circumstances — this would more clearly align with the factors considered in college admissions. For example, research from The Economist found that being economically disadvantaged poses seven times as large of a challenge to high student achievement as does race.

Overall, the issue of affirmative action is an undoubtedly complex one. The importance of including a diverse group of voices in higher education should not be understated, but the method of achieving this goal can be improved upon. Affirmative action served its purpose, as asserted by the Supreme Court, and it is time to consider more comprehensive solutions that do not impede certain racial groups while elevating others.

Maya Shah can be reached at [email protected].