The UC system only did so because they were mandated to by law (specifically a voter initiative), and they still try to use as many proxies for race as possible in order to try and be racist in their admissions policies.
But that's completely legitimate. If black people (for example) are systemically poorer than white people as a group, it makes sense to give them more help.
It's favoring a wealthy black person over a poor white person, that's arguably problematic.
Every color of person is capable of performing at the same level as any other. However, not every person is capable of performing at the level some universities require. There are dummies and geniuses in every color/racial group. There are high achievers and low achievers in every group. Every single human attribute is a bell curve in the general population. By not picking the best of the lot regardless of how the result looks we are damaging the ability of the nation to compete.
As an Asian man, i'll agree. Except instead of levelers, these are usually used as bludgeons to punish groups rather than leveling groups. Based on the UMich and other college lawsuits, what we found out was that Asians were held to higher standards, except Jewish people werent. Neither were wealthy Protestants. Neither were well connected white people.
The "Progressive" systems used the excuse of DEI to help discriminate against Asians and others they didnt like.
Now, you ask the same policy makers, can I as an Asian man be allowed into the basketball or football team, and they look at you like "but youre not qualified"
Found the Harvard admissions officer.