Newly published statistical data allegedly confirm Harvard’s discrimination against Asian-American applicants.

A group of economists recently published statistics that allegedly confirm that Harvard University’s admissions office had discriminated against Asian-Americans. The group of economists, which includes Glenn Loury of Brown University, Michael Keane of the University of New South Wales, Hanming Fang of the University of Pennsylvania, Yingyao Hu of Johns Hopkins University, and Matthew Shum of the California Institute of Technology, came to the conclusion that Harvard exercises bias in its admissions practice by indirectly harming the acceptance chances for certain Asian applicants.

The economists applied mathematic models to the admissions data that was made public as a result of a lawsuit against Harvard. “Asian-American applicants in the top academic decile are less likely to receive a high personal-rating score than white applicants in the top 50%,” the economists wrote. “This remarkable racial disparity does not appear in the personal ratings given by alumni who actually interview applicants.”

During their analysis of the admissions data, the economists made a startling discovery. Asian applicants with better academic scores almost always had a lower “personal-rating” score. “Inexplicably, the most academically competitive Asian Americans do much worse in Harvard’s personal-rating score than do academically similar applicants of other races. … In other words, personal-rating scores make the top-performing Asian-American applicants less competitive while making other top-performing applicants more competitive,” they wrote.

Breitbart News reported in June that Harvard had systematically given low “personal-rating” scores to Asian-American applicants. Many of the low scores had been given to students who had not even met with the admissions office. The lawsuit, which was filed by activist group Students for Fair Admissions, has been given a tentative October trial date.