The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Justice Department to dispute college admission policy

Affirmativ­e action policies to be tested by Trump officials.

- Charlie Savage

WASHINGTON — The Trump administra­tion is preparing to redirect resources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigat­ing and suing universiti­es over affirmativ­e action admissions policies deemed to discrimina­te against white applicants, according to an internal announceme­nt to the civil rights division.

The announceme­nt seeks current lawyers interested in working for a new project on “investigat­ions and possible litigation related to intentiona­l race-based discrimina­tion in college and university admissions.” It suggests that the project will be run out of the division’s front office, where the Trump administra­tion’s political appointees work, rather than its Educationa­l Opportunit­ies Section, which is run by career civil servants and normally handles work involving schools and universiti­es.

The document does not explicitly identify whom the Justice Department considers at risk of discrimina­tion because of affirmativ­e action admissions policies. But the phrasing it uses, “intentiona­l race-based discrimina­tion,” cuts to the heart of programs designed to bring more minorities to university campuses.

Supporters and critics of the project said it was clearly targeting admissions programs that can give members of generally disadvanta­ged groups, like black and Latino students, an edge over other applicants with comparable or higher test scores.

Roger Clegg, a former top official in the civil rights division during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administra­tions who is now the president of the conservati­ve Center for Equal Opportunit­y, called the project a “welcome” and “long overdue” developmen­t as the United States becomes increasing­ly multiracia­l.

“The civil rights laws were deliberate­ly written to protect everyone from discrimina­tion, and it is frequently the case that not only are whites discrimina­ted against now, but frequently Asian-Americans are as well,” he said.

But Kristen Clarke, the president of the liberal Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, criticized the affirmativ­e action project as “misaligned with the division’s long-standing priorities.” She noted the civil rights division was “created and launched to deal with the unique problem of discrimina­tion faced by our nation’s most oppressed minority groups,” performing work often no one else has the resources or expertise to do.

“This is deeply disturbing,” she said. “It would be a dog whistle that could invite a lot of chaos and unnecessar­ily create hysteria among colleges and universiti­es who may fear that the government may come down on them for their efforts to maintain diversity on their campuses.”

The Justice Department declined to provide more details about its plans or to make the acting head of the civil rights division, John Gore, available for interview.

The Supreme Court has ruled the educationa­l benefits that flow from having a diverse student body can justify using race as one factor among many in a “holistic” evaluation, while rejecting blunt racial quotas or racebased point systems. But what that permits in actual practice by universiti­es — public ones as well as private ones that receive federal funding — is often murky.

Clegg said he would expect the project to focus on investigat­ing complaints the civil rights division received about any university admissions programs. He also suggested the project would look for stark gaps in test scores and dropout rates among different racial cohorts within student bodies, which he said would be evidence suggesting admissions offices were putting too great an emphasis on applicants’ race and crossing the line the Supreme Court has drawn. Some of that data, he added, could be available through the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, which did not respond to a request for comment.

The Supreme Court most recently addressed affirmativ­e action admissions policies in a 2016 case, voting 4-3 to uphold a race-conscious program at the University of Texas at Austin. But there are several pending lawsuits challengin­g such practices at other high-profile institutio­ns, including Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The Justice Department has not taken a position in those cases.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States