Yale and Princeton to Supreme Court: Go to hell.

The new massive resistance shows its face.

Yale and Princeton have published the racial breakdown of their entering classes. They show that both institutions have violated the ban on racial discrimination in college admissions that the Supreme Court affirmed last year.

Readers of a certain age will remember the South’s “massive resistance” to the Supreme Court’s anti-school discrimination decisions, starting with Brown v. Board. I believe that what Yale and Princeton have now done is the harbinger of massive resistance to the Court’s anti-school discrimination decisions of last year.

Yale’s first class since the Supreme Court’s ruling will have about the same percentage of blacks as its previous class:

According to the first-year class profile released by the admissions office, 14 percent of the class of 2028 identifies as African American, 24 percent as Asian American, 19 percent as Hispanic or Latino, 3 percent as Native American and 46 percent as white. 

Compared to the class of 2027, admitted in the last race-conscious admissions cycle, the class of 2028 saw a 4 percent increase in the share of white students and a 6 percent decrease in the share of Asian American students. The percentage of both Black or African American students and Native American students remained the same. 

(Emphasis added)

So the losers are Asian-Americans. It’s almost enough to make me think that Yale is punishing this group because some of its members had the audacity to challenge the racial spoils system at Harvard.

In maintaining its quota for black students, Yale is continuing the unlawful discrimination it has long practiced. That discrimination was thoroughly documented by the Justice Department in a suit it filed against Yale (a suit dropped by Joe Biden and Merrick Garland).

That lawsuit showed that blacks in the tenth decile (the top ten percent of applicants according to Yale’s own rating system) are admitted to Yale at a rate of 60 percent. By contrast, Whites are admitted at a rate of 20 percent and Asians at a rate of only 14 percent. In the fourth decile, Blacks are admitted at a rate of 12 percent — about the same rate at which Asians in the tenth decile (the top one) are admitted. The admission rates for Whites and Asians in the fourth decile are just 2 percent and 2.5 percent, respectively. Discrimination of a similar magnitude existed in all ten deciles.

The suit also showed that Yale engages in racial balancing by keeping black representation in its entering classes nearly the same, year after year. The new numbers show that Yale is still doing this.

Given the enormous disparity in academic credentials between blacks on the one hand and whites and Asian Americans on the other, there is no way Yale could have a freshman class with 14 percent black representation without basing its admissions on race.

Undoubtedly, Yale has changed the pretexts it uses to explain its preference for blacks with credentials vastly inferior to rejected whites and, especially, Asian-Americans. Presumably, it is relying on language from the Supreme Court permitting consideration of barriers that applicants say they have overcome.

But the Court also warned that colleges can’t do by indirection that which they are legally barred from doing directly. No amount of alleged barrier-overcoming could justify Yale’s new numbers.

Princeton is not taking a backseat to Yale when it comes to flipping the bird at the Supreme Court and Asian Americans:

The first Princeton class admitted following the Supreme Court decision banning race-conscious affirmative action has experienced little change in racial diversity, according to enrollment statistics released by the University on Wednesday.

The University’s admission numbers are in stark contrast to its peer institution, MIT, which saw a dramatic drop in Black and Hispanic/Latine enrollment following the ban. Hispanic/Latine enrollment at Princeton experienced a one point drop, from 10 percent to nine percent, while Black enrollment shifted by less than one percent.

Asian American enrollment, however, experienced a 2.2 percent decrease from 26 percent to 23.8 percent.

(Emphasis added)

I’m guessing that the rest of the Ivy League will also flout the law. Indeed, I’m surprised that colleges like MIT, Tufts, and Amherst did not — this year.

What is to be done? Yale and Princeton have left aggrieved, highly qualified but rejected Asian American applicants no choice but to sue at least one of them (and/or perhaps another Ivy League school with comparable numbers). Yale and Princeton surely understand this.

However, they also understand that litigation takes time. When the next big case reaches the Supreme Court, its composition might have changed, either due to the retirement of conservative Justices or to court packing. Or maybe the arrogant leaders of Yale and Princeton think their lawyers can sweet talk, or wear down, some of the conservative Justices into overlooking the new massive resistance.

If Trump is elected, I expect the DOJ to sue Yale again. The template is already in place, though additional investigating will be required.

In addition, perhaps the Department of Education will reopen its investigation into Princeton and its scofflaw president, Christopher Eisgruber. This exemplar of white guilt (real or phony) got himself into trouble by stating that Princeton, under his leadership, engaged in race discrimination. The Trump administration took him at his word and opened an investigation. The Biden administration shut it down.

Beyond legal recourse, perhaps alumni and top high school students will strike a blow against the lawlessness at Yale, Princeton, et al. — alums with their purses and students with their feet. As noted, there are top colleges that seem to be following the law — or at least following it more closely than Yale and Princeton. MIT is the best example.

Applicants might consider eschewing Yale and Princeton in favor of colleges that aren’t egregiously violating the law. Unfortunately, there might not be enough of them to go around.