Confronting Misinformation through Social Science Research: SFFA v. Harvard

In the ongoing case of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, Edward Blum is attempting once again to use Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), his anti-affirmative action organization, to further limit the use of race as one factor in holistic admissions processes. But this time, Blum purports to be acting on behalf of a group of anonymous Asian Americans. This strategy, designed to dismantle all affirmative action policies in selective college admissions, is an attempt to drive divisions between Asian Americans and other people of color to increase white access and entitlement to highly selective universities. SFFA falsely claims that Asian Americans are discriminated against in Harvard’s admissions process, basing its claims on misleading information and launching a deceptive media campaign against affirmative action. In the summer of 2018, 531 social scientists with expertise on Asian Americans, race and equity, or college admissions, filed an amicus curiae brief with the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts in support of Harvard University’s holistic admissions process. The brief details the myriad ways in which the plaintiff’s claims are false and misleading and provides evidence that Asian Americans in fact benefit from holistic review. In this article, the authors of the brief provide background information on the case itself, the legal and social context of the case, as well as the importance of social scientists’ participation in producing research relevant to the topic at hand. Following the preface, the brief is printed in full as originally filed, and edited only to comport with the format of this journal. Trial proceedings in the case concluded in early 2019. As of the publishing date of this article, the case remains pending before the district court.