Supreme Court kills affirmative action in university admissions

#1
lawgator1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
72,041
Likes
42,581
#1
I'll try to link the opinion later, though I'm sure some crafty individual can accomplish that before I.

I have mixed feelings about this.
 
#7
#7
Higher Ed (well all but HE in particular) is facing a major transformation. This ruling will accelerate that.

Because K-12 preparation (in addition other factors) is a critical component in college admissions this too should but additional momentum behind the School Choice trend.

This ruling will not prevent capable students from admission to high quality higher ed opportunities - it will just reduce the opportunities at the highest rated universities which serve a small fraction of higher ed students.

A net positive ruling
 
#8
#8
oof - what a bad analogy from the defendant

Waxman admitted that race was decisive "for some highly qualified applicants," just like "being … an oboe player in a year in which the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra needs an oboe player."

"We did not fight a civil war about oboe players," Roberts shot back. "We did fight a civil war to eliminate racial discrimination."
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, AM64, vols40 and 5 others
#9
#9
UT_VOLS13 said:
Supreme Court rejects affirmative action in ruling on universities using race in admissions decisions
Click to expand...
I fully expect the universities to continue doing exactly what they've always been doing. Liberals like to just ignore court decisions that aren't in their favor. Some of them may find another way to justify their decisions. However, my guess is that before finalizing their admissions decisions, they'll apply a race filter over it to make sure that they made "the correct decision".
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, AM64, dovervolz and 4 others
#10
#10
volinbham said:
Higher Ed (well all but HE in particular) is facing a major transformation. This ruling will accelerate that.

Because K-12 preparation (in addition other factors) is a critical component in college admissions this too should but additional momentum behind the School Choice trend.

This ruling will not prevent capable students from admission to high quality higher ed opportunities - it will just reduce the opportunities at the highest rated universities which serve a small fraction of higher ed students.

A net positive ruling
Click to expand...


The assumption is that across large numbers the long term effect of racial disparity is not significant enough to justify AA. The reason my reaction to that is mixed is that:

A) I fault AA like this because there's no way to measure either the input of racial disparity or the counter effects AA had on that. Thus there is no way for any university to know it has met its goals and AA may be ended.

But

B) I do think we are short of that mark at this time. So I think it's premature.
 
#12
#12
volinbham said:
oof - what a bad analogy from the defendant

Waxman admitted that race was decisive "for some highly qualified applicants," just like "being … an oboe player in a year in which the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra needs an oboe player."

"We did not fight a civil war about oboe players," Roberts shot back. "We did fight a civil war to eliminate racial discrimination."
Click to expand...
I wonder where Roberts learned history; sounds like Disneyland.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, DuckInAPen, GroverCleveland and 1 other person
#13
#13
the ruling just takes the blanket criteria of race off the table - one can still argue individually how their race led to their experiences and accordingly it can be still part of the admissions decision.

using it as a stand alone criteria does/did virtually nothing to alleviate racial disparity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol, LouderVol and volfanhill
#15
#15
Race should not be a data point that is allowed to be in the database of university applicants at all (either via the university applications requiring that data themselves or via the universities acquiring that data externally from data aggregators or other third parties). That is the ONLY way to prevent universities from continuing to do whatever they want to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zhangliao04, Vol since 77, Sea Ray and 1 other person
#18
#18
Whole point is to stop seeing people through a racial lense. Darn Dems want to keep it alive so they can keep minorities enslaved to their perpetual victimhood and thus their need for bwanna massa lady Karen to heps them.

Dems claim that being colorblind is being racist! Can you image MLK turning over in his grave?

In today's day and age - why should anyone care what color skin you have at all? are you 1/8 black, 1/4 mexican, 2/3 irish? who cares?

The whole idea is to see people for what they are not what they look like. What they are is based on what they believe and how they think, the choices they make.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, joevol33, zhangliao04 and 12 others
#22
#22
Had they done this 5 years ago my son might have applied to MIT but he’d been brainwashed by his teachers to believe white privilege would work against him. And he was valid victorian at his HS. His Hispanic friend however did apply and now has an EE degree from MIT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, McDad and StarRaider
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top