Page:Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College.pdf/114

8 Brief for Asian American Coalition for Education et al. as Amici Curiae 12–14, 18–19. Paid advisors, in turn, tell high school students of Asian descent to downplay their heritage to maximize their odds of admission. “ ‘We will make them appear less Asian when they apply,’ ” one promises. Id., at 16. “ ‘If you’re given an option, don’t attach a photograph to your application,’ ” another instructs. Ibid. It is difficult to imagine those who receive this advice would find comfort in a bald (and mistaken) assurance that “race-conscious admissions benefit … the Asian American community,” (, dissenting). See 397 F. Supp. 3d, at 178 (district court finding that “overall” Harvard’s race-conscious admissions policy “results in fewer Asian American[s]” being admitted). And it is hard not to wonder whether those left paying the steepest price are those least able to afford it—children of families with no chance of hiring the kind of consultants who know how to play this game.

Just as there is no question Harvard and UNC consider race in their admissions processes, there is no question both schools intentionally treat some applicants worse than others because of their race. Both schools frequently choose to