In 2023, the Supreme Court finally struck down race-based college admissions. The ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard was supposed to close the book on universities sorting applicants by skin color. Millions of Americans cheered. About time.

But a ruling is only as good as its enforcement. When the Trump administration moved to verify whether Harvard was actually complying, the university did what entitled institutions do best – it stonewalled. The DOJ requested admissions records. Harvard delayed, dodged, and dragged its feet. So the Justice Department sued. Reasonable enough. Except the court had other ideas.

From Fox News:

A federal judge on Monday dismissed the Trump administration’s lawsuit seeking to force Harvard University to turn over admissions records as part of an investigation into whether the Ivy League school continues to consider race in its admissions process.

U.S. District Judge Myong Joun ruled that the Justice Department had not adequately established that it followed required procedures before suing Harvard to obtain applicant-level admissions data.

A court runs interference

Here’s what matters: Judge Joun didn’t examine whether Harvard is still discriminating. He didn’t peek behind the curtain. He tossed the case because, in his view, the DOJ hadn’t checked every bureaucratic box before walking into his courtroom. So the wealthiest university on the planet keeps its admissions data under lock and key – not because it earned a clean bill of health, but because of a procedural technicality.

That’s not justice. That’s a shield.

Harvard, meanwhile, went further. The university’s lawyers claimed the entire federal investigation was “retaliatory.” A school under civil rights scrutiny playing the victim. Attorney General Pam Bondi wasn’t having it: “Harvard has failed to disclose the data we need to ensure that its admissions are free of discrimination.”

When an institution refuses transparency and then screams persecution, the arrogance speaks for itself.

Even Judge Joun conceded his own ruling doesn’t resolve “Harvard’s underlying Title VI compliance.” He knows the real question remains unanswered. He just chose not to answer it.

Enforce the law or lose it

The dismissal came without prejudice. Translation: the administration can refile. It absolutely should – without delay. If an ordinary American refused to cooperate with a federal civil rights investigation, consequences would follow swiftly. Harvard shouldn’t operate under a different standard just because it sits on a $50 billion endowment and enjoys sympathetic judges.

The Supreme Court was unambiguous in 2023. Three years later, Harvard still won’t show its work. Courts that look the other way aren’t serving justice. They’re serving privilege.

Key Takeaways

• A federal judge dismissed the DOJ’s Harvard lawsuit on procedural grounds, not on merit.
• Harvard still refuses to demonstrate compliance with the Supreme Court’s admissions ruling.
• The dismissal leaves the door open for the Trump administration to refile immediately.
• Elite institutions should not receive special protection when defying federal civil rights law.

Source: Fox News