Department of Justice Allegations Regarding Racial Preferences in Yale School of Medicine Admissions
司法部指控耶魯大學醫學院在招生中存在種族偏好
Introduction
The United States Department of Justice has accused the Yale School of Medicine of violating federal civil rights laws by utilizing race-based criteria in its student selection process.
美國司法部指控耶魯大學醫學院在學生選拔過程中利用基於種族的標準，違反了聯邦民權法。
Main Body
The Department of Justice (DOJ), via Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, asserts that Yale University has contravened Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This determination follows a year-long investigation into the institution's admissions protocols. The DOJ contends that the university employed a 'holistic' review process as a mechanism to identify and prioritize applicants based on race, utilizing racial proxies to circumvent the 2023 Supreme Court mandate prohibiting affirmative action in higher education. Specifically, the agency alleges that the university's continued maintenance of diverse cohorts, despite previous claims in an amicus brief that such diversity was unattainable without explicit racial consideration, constitutes evidence of a willful failure to comply with judicial directives.
司法部（DOJ）透過助理總檢察長 Harmeet Dhillon 主張，耶魯大學違反了 1964 年《民權法》第六條。此決定是在對該機構的招生程序進行為期一年的調查後做出的。司法部認為，該大學將「整體性」審核程序作為根據種族識別並優先考慮申請人的機制，利用種族替代指標來規避 2023 年最高法院禁止高等教育採取「積極採取行動」（affirmative action）的指令。具體而言，該機構指稱，儘管大學先前在法庭友人陳述書中聲稱若無明確的種族考量則無法達成多元化，但其仍持續維持多元化的學生群體，這證明其蓄意未能遵守司法指令。
Quantitative data cited by the DOJ indicates a significant disparity in admission probabilities. For the 2023, 2024, and 2025 cohorts, the agency reports that Black and Hispanic applicants were admitted with lower median grade-point averages and standardized test scores than their white and Asian counterparts. For instance, in the most recent class, Black students exhibited a median GPA of 3.88 and 95th percentile MCAT scores, whereas Asian and white students recorded medians of 3.98 and 3.97 respectively, with 100th percentile MCAT scores. The DOJ further posits that a Black applicant possessed odds of securing an interview up to 29 times higher than an Asian applicant with equivalent academic credentials.
司法部引用的量化數據顯示，錄取機率存在顯著差異。針對 2023、2024 與 2025 年的入學群體，該機構報告指出，黑人與拉丁裔申請者被錄取時的平均 GPA 與標準化測試分數低於白人與亞裔申請者。例如，在最近一屆學生中，黑人學生的平均 GPA 為 3.88，MCAT 分數為第 95 百分位；而亞裔與白人學生的平均 GPA 分別為 3.98 與 3.97，MCAT 分數均為第 100 百分位。司法部進一步認為，一名黑人申請者獲得面試機會的機率，最高可達一名學歷相當的亞裔申請者的 29 倍。
This action is situated within a broader administrative strategy to eliminate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) frameworks in academia. The DOJ has characterized the prioritization of race over academic excellence in medical education as a public safety concern, given the federal funding involved in physician training. This enforcement action follows similar notifications sent to the University of California, Los Angeles, and coincides with ongoing investigations into Stanford, Ohio State, and the University of California, San Diego, as well as litigation against Harvard University. Conversely, some academic perspectives suggest the administration's interpretation of the Supreme Court ruling is overly restrictive, arguing that the consideration of individual character and personal growth remains permissible.
此舉屬於一個更廣泛的行政策略，旨在消除學術界中的「多元、公平與包容」（DEI）框架。考慮到醫師培訓涉及聯邦資金，司法部將醫學教育中種族優先於學術卓越的現象定調為公共安全問題。在此次執法行動之前，加州大學洛杉磯分校（UCLA）已收到類似通知，同時司法部也正在對史丹佛大學、俄亥俄州立大學與加州大學聖地牙哥分校（UCSD）進行調查，並對哈佛大學提起訴訟。相反地，部分學術觀點認為政府對最高法院裁決的解釋過於嚴苛，主張考量個人特質與個人成長仍應獲允許。
Conclusion
The DOJ is currently seeking a voluntary resolution agreement with Yale University, while reserving the right to initiate judicial proceedings to ensure compliance with federal law.
司法部目前正尋求與耶魯大學達成自願解決協議，同時保留啟動司法程序的權利，以確保其遵守聯邦法律。
Vocabulary Learning
The Architecture of 'Legalistic Evasion' & Precision Verbs
To move from B2 to C2, a student must stop using generic verbs (say, think, do) and begin using performative verbs—words that do not just describe an action, but define the legal or intellectual status of that action.
⚡ The 'Precision Pivot'
Look at how the text replaces common descriptions with high-density academic alternatives:
- Contravened instead of broke the law.
- Circumvent instead of get around.
- Posits instead of suggests or claims.
At the C2 level, posits is superior because it implies the proposal of a theoretical basis for an argument, whereas claims often suggests a lack of evidence. To circumvent is not merely to avoid, but to find a strategic, often deceptive, way around a restriction.
🔍 Linguistic Phenomenon: The Nominalized Shield
Note the phrase: "...constitutes evidence of a willful failure to comply with judicial directives."
Rather than saying "Yale willfully failed to comply," the author uses nominalization ("constitutes evidence of a willful failure"). This is a hallmark of C2 'Institutional English.' It shifts the focus from the actor (the university) to the abstract concept (the failure).
Why this matters for C2 mastery: Nominalization allows the writer to maintain an objective, detached distance. It transforms a direct accusation into a formal observation of a state of affairs. This is essential for writing high-level legal briefs, academic papers, or diplomatic correspondence.
🛠️ Syntactic Sophistication: The 'Contrastive Anchor'
Observe the final paragraph's transition: "Conversely, some academic perspectives suggest..."
B2 students often rely on However or On the other hand. The use of Conversely serves as a logical anchor that signals a complete inversion of the previous premise, rather than just a simple disagreement. It frames the debate as two opposing systemic interpretations rather than two differing opinions.