This is what that odious little troll Stephen Miller is not arguing - that any consideration other than test scores is discriminatory (though he is curiously silent re legacy admits). It's disheartening how many here appear to be lockstep with him. |
Interestingly 40% was when they got really uncomfortable with Jews in the past, and invented Holistic policy. 35% - 40% is a very reasonable line they try to hold. It'll be interesting to see. I have my popcorn ready. |
It's disheartening how the SCOTUS has ruled the law of the land and little trolls come on here thinking they are smarter than the justices we all voted in. |
Caltech is 40% Asian. And it's not because of a lawsuit. |
Not a good example. Small, specialty STEM school that is known for rigor. The pool of students applying are predominantly Asian and white. The 40% reflects the demographics of the pool of students. |
Being poor/middle class and unconnected is not a protected class. I say this as a middle class unconnected person. I don't see a legal basis for this. |
A few lawyer friends noted that Congress could pass a law making legacy illegal and because most private institutions accept federal funds, they would be required to follow the law. |
This is a nothingburger. Maybe a few more Asian Americans at Harvard. So what? Most Asian Americans live in California. In California, 51% of Asian American college students attend community colleges. The myth that all Asian Americans are high stats strivers attending elite schools is just that: a myth. |
A politician who push this will get a lot of votes |
But they never will because successful politicians thrive in the legacy/connections/favors/"deans list" world. |
they need to get elected first to be a successful politician first thing they do is whatever it takes to get votes |
Meh. Legacy is not a protected class.
I think the data from the Harvard lawsuit is fairly old at this point. Most legacies are not admitted no matter how qualified they are. I don't care if legacy preference goes away, but I also don't think getting rid of legacy is likely to move the needle in admissions for any applicants no matter their race or academic stats. It may be a tie-breaker, but is not a significant hook at most schools. Small potatoes. Big donor hook is different from legacy and the numbers of applicants there are not meaningful either, as unseemly as the category may be. Athletics is the big enchilada, in terms of hooks and their impact on squeezing out admission of other applicants. |
You should open your eyes. Why is our government supporting something that helps so few students? |
OK but would you also say "so what?" to the outcome that there will be a few less blacks and Hispanics at HYPS? I doubt it. |
The Economist's view:
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2023/06/30/why-affirmative-action-in-american-universities-had-to-go My view: why give a further advantage to kids who already benefited from all the advantages their Ivy-league parents could afford? |