Harvard University is under no obligation in admitting anyone and are at liberty accepting, rejecting, and rescinding offers of admissions of whomever they choose. Of course, Harvard neither graduates saints e.g. Jared Kushner, Barak H Obama, admits saints e.g. the Rescinded Ten, nor does a Harvard matriculation produce saints e.g. Brittany J. Smith, so it is not as if Harvard has established ethical creditability for passing moral judgment. 

     UC Berkeley, University of Michigan, NYU, and both Harvard’s own History and American Studies departments all recognized the potential of Michelle Jones for her scholastic production and promise of more, but Harvard’s (and Yale’s equivalent) Graduate School of Arts and Sciences did not (care). Buried in the New York Times profile on Michelle Jones is the claim that Harvard has admitted formerly incarcerated individuals.

     If the gravid quality of Jones’s horrendous crime is the inhibiting factor, then does there exists some scale of crimes against which possible means of redemption is measured? So if a person commits, say crime X, then there is a list of how they are allowed to redeem themselves versus some one who commits crime Y, where Y > X, then they have fewer avenues of redemption.

     Compared to Chelsea Manning, which some like to make, Michelle Jones’s situation is more disquieting. Manning was invited to be a fellow at Harvard in spite of or because of the crime they had committed versus Jones who has demonstrated, in the eyes of her academic peers and betters, brilliant scholarship and other creative output post-crime all while incarcerated. One great aspect of the United States compared to Germany or China, especially with regards to education, are the multitude of pathways at a second chance in societal life through education. Even one who is 65 years old may still get admitted into a top university (http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/08/29/never-too-late-for-college-pittsburg-woman-proves) or a high school dropout graduate with a PhD at 68. (http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2007/05/16_sattwa.shtml)

     Harvard’s (and Yale’s) rejection of Michelle Jones makes two things clear: (1) the Ivy League are disinclined being the venue that will host a possible redemption and, I think a number of Asian(-American)s will testify on this, (2) scholarship is of secondary importance.http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/9/19/klonsky-rejection-of-michelle-jones-is-harvard-loss/#.WcD2EcBTvAZ.facebook