To the first part - Harvard's admissions policy does not select based on race. The trait mentioned in the NY times article is 'character;' according to several different websites explaining the selection process, the trait looks for people who have overcome significant hardships or have helped others overcome significant hardships on a national scale to get the best score. The fact that there is a correlation with race on the average score does not make it racist, just like the SATs aren't racist just because there is correlation between race and score even when adjusted for income. Perhaps more people would claim that Harvard's policy was racist if the article showed a correlation with blacks or Hispanics instead of Asians, but those people are idiots.
To the second part, Harvard's student body is 25% Asian when the national makeup is 6%. Accusing them of biasing against Asians in the admissions process is tilting at windmills.
I think that anytime the demographics of a sub group of people significantly diverge from the national makeup of the country, organizational leaders should ask why, examine whether their policies are inadvertently selecting one group over another, and when the job doesn't require traits of a particular race or gender they should attempt to recruit qualified members of under represented groups. If anything, Harvard should be looking at why its student body is disproportionately Asian.
