The U.S. Justice Department on Thursday threw its support behind a lawsuit accusing Harvard University of discriminating against Asian-American applicants, saying the Ivy League school’s race-based admissions process disadvantaged them.
The department, which has been investigating Harvard for potential civil rights violations, made its argument in a brief filed in federal court in Boston in a closely watched lawsuit that is set to go to trial in October.
The Justice Department argued that Harvard had failed in the lawsuit to establish that its use of race as a factor in deciding which students to offer admissions to had not resulted in it illegally discriminating against Asian-Americans.
Instead, the department said the evidence in the lawsuit by Students for Fair Admissions demonstrated that Harvard’s admissions process “significantly disadvantages” Asian-Americans compared with other racial groups.
“No American should be denied admission to school because of their race,” U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement.
Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Harvard did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that universities may use affirmative action to help minority applicants get into college. Conservatives have said such programs can hurt white people and Asian-Americans.
In 2016 the nation’s highest court rejected a high-profile challenge to a University of Texas program designed to boost the enrollment of minority students, which was brought by a white woman.
After Republican President Donald Trump took office last year, the Justice Department began investigating whether Harvard’s policies are discriminatory because they limit the acceptance of Asian-Americans.
Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Dan Grebler
Fox’s John Roberts: Trump’s attack on Yovanovitch caused ‘a lot of damage’ to foreheads at the White House
On today's edition of Your World, Fox News Neil Cavuto asked White House correspondent John Roberts what he thinks the consequences will be for President Trump's apparent attempt to intimidate former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch -- at the very moment she was testifying at the second public hearing of the House's impeachment inquiry.
"I don't know how much political damage that tweet is going to do, Neil, but certainly I think there was a lot of damage here at the White House to a collective group of foreheads as people went like this..." Roberts said, while mimicking someone smacking their forehead in frustration. "...as the President tweeted that out right in the middle of the hearing."
‘American hero’ Marie Yovanovitch gets standing ovation ‘drowning out and effectively answering’ GOP’s ‘limp objections’
'Poignant and Perfect'
Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was heralded with a standing ovation as her five-plus hours of calm and patriotic testimony ended and House Republicans tried to commandeer the last whiffs of Friday's impeachment proceedings.
Republicans demanded they be given extra time to speak as the hearing was gaveled to a close, claiming they had been disparaged and had the right to respond.
They did not.
As she stood and began to walk away, audience members in the gallery cheered, and gave Ambassador Yovanovitch a standing ovation.
‘This is not about tweets!’ GOP lawmaker deflects wildly when asked about Trump’s attacks on Yovanovitch
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) on Friday was not happy to be asked about President Donald Trump's tweets attacking former American ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.
During a press conference that occurred after the day's impeachment hearings, Stefanik tried to make the case that nothing in Yovanovitch's testimony provided any reason to impeach the president.
She was thrown off her game, however, when a reporter asked her whether the president's tweet harmed her party's ability to send a consistent message.
"We're not here to talk about tweets but impeachable offenses!" she angrily replied. "Let me answer your question. These hearings are not about tweets. They are about impeachment of the president of United States. This is a constitutional matter."