Well, yes, it actually is. If it is supposedly harder academically at these institutions, then that should offset the caliber of students. It is pretty well documented that there has at least been, at one point, grade inflation at many of the ivy schools (meaning grades were one average lower at point X than Y, Z, etc, in a time frame of years).
I really find it hard to believe that it is harder to get A's at many of the Ivy schools than quite a few of the public schools. Are you going to tell me with a straight face that intro to chem at Harvard is any harder than intro to chem at Berkeley, U Mich, UW, etc?
The material is not harder the curve is. At Yale, almost everyone one of my classmates was in the top 10 in their highschool class and scored in the top 1% of all test takers on standardized exams. Even if you look at minorities (which I am, because I am black) they are admitted with lower stats. But what are lower stats? For me, I was number 10 out of 500 in my class and scored a 34 on the ACT. If, for hypothetical purposes, the dumbest person in your class was still in the top 10 in his high school and scored exceptionally well on standardized tests, don't you think the average grade will be considerably higher than the average grade at a school like Berkeley?
Also, would it at all seem reasonable to anyone to have the percentage of grades given out at a school like Berkeley be equivalent to the percentage of grades given out at Yale? No. It would be an injustice to penalize us for our academic ability by imposing a curve where half of all the students received a C or lower. Because in all honesty, few people here would produce work that was worthy of a C.