Georgetown University law professor Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, writing on the Volokh Conspiracy blog, has a good idea: reform immigration law and get rid of racial quotas and preferences (aka “affirmative action”). Politically, he says it’s a natural bargain: Democrats get expanded legal immigration, Republicans get rid of quotas. In policy terms, it makes sense too. Why should people we classify as Hispanics be given preferred status when they and their ancestors never suffered discrimination in this country? And certainly not the kind of institutionalized, state-imposed discrimination — slavery and segregation — that was imposed on the ancestors of most American blacks.

At the same time, as Rosenkranz points out, Asians are subjected to the opposite of racial preferences. His example: a Hispanic applicant to the University of Wisconsin law school with respectable grades and test scores would have a 62 percent chance of admission, while an Asian applicant with identical credentials would have a 16 percent chance. Thus it’s hardly a surprise that Asian applicants are suing Harvard for racial discrimination. At foxnews.com writer Maxim Lott points out that the Princeton Review, a college guide, advises Asian applicants: “Don’t attach a photograph to your application and don’t answer the optional question about your ethnic background,” and for any required essay, “Write about something entirely unrelated to your ethnic background.” My guess is that it’s easier to get away with this if your last name is Lee than if it is Chen or Gupta.