id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
blsr-12993	Ratanjee, Taline	Affirmative Action in College Admissions: Successes and Failings	2020	11	.pdf	application/pdf	3236	143	45	The plaintiff, Students for Fair Admissions, presented the Court with three primary arguments with respect to Harvard’s admissions practices: (1) the University engaged in intentional discrimination, (2) the University attempted to create racial-balancing, and (3) the University did not use race as a “plus factor” for the purpose of critical mass.1 The defendant, Harvard University, defended its case by: (1) rationalizing its admissions policies, (2) connecting its admissions policies to the creation of a diverse student body, and (3) asserting that its admissions policy was aimed at allowing all students to have a safe and welcoming environment at Harvard.2 ”11 Harvard then utilizes this notion in acknowledging its reaffirmance in the 2016 Fisher II case, ultimately arguing that it was simply exercising the right to determine admittance based on the University’s definition of diversity.12 As stated in Harvard’s Fisher II amicus brief, “individualized admissions programs 9 Chiu, Cynthia.	cache/blsr-12993.pdf	txt/blsr-12993.txt
