Those policies are illegal and unconstitutional. If there’s a law that “allows” them, that law is invalid and not binding.
Harvard is a private college. The US Constitution protects their right to peacefully assemble (for the purpose of education, commerce and research) AS THEY PLEASE.
Since Harvard is not a state school, the 14th amendment does not apply. Further, it is not a “public accommodation” as it is not open to everyone.
You could argue that those receiving state grants, scholarships or loans could infer the attachment of the 14th amendment but that would first apply to the granting of such financial instruments.
In short, you have NO RIGHT to be treated equally outside of the government. You have no more “right” to be accepted to Harvard than you have the “right” to trespass on someone’s property.
BUT from my many years of experience w/ Affirmative Action in Employment. Recruitment does not guarantee acceptance. I recruit from the under represented group but then accept the most qualified within that group. That acceptance criteria needs to be specific and measurable.
I do not agree with what they are doing, but share this to help Freepers in how the Court may look at this.