For the record, I understood you to say that Hogg's race gave him a leg up with admissions. "Given that approx 43% of the student body is white, and 75% of the faculty and professors are white, Hogg's very sympathetic selection was that much easier (guess what? he's white)." I observed that actually Harvard selects a majority of its students from non-whites. I guess, anyway, because I don't know what "non-resident" is. We need to see more about the numbers, such as numbers of applicants from each category, with acceptance rates for each.

I'm not taking a position on Hogg, but anyone familiar with college admissions will tell you it's a disadvantage being white if applying to Harvard, unless maybe you're a legacy or something. The percentage enrollment doesn't tell you otherwise as it doesn't show you the competition within groups. A minority applicant (other than Asian -- hence the lawsuit) needs lower scores/accomplishments to get in, does anyone doubt that? They basically came out and said it, with racial diversity being a goal (regardless of whether you think that's a good policy or not).

Harvard issued a statement about the Asian discrimination issue that said something along the lines of: race (being a minority) can help you, but it can't hurt you. Which is of course absurd as there are a limited number of spaces, so that means the same thing.

https://nypost.com/2018/10/17/harvards- ... d-on-race/