DOJ sued Harvard for defying admissions probe - Will this create a chilling effect on this year's RD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the Asian population has jumped significantly as has the SAT median so that should make the government happy.

The MAGAs definitely tipped the scales in favor of Asians and Indians.

It's funny how people like you see the removal of discrimination as conferring favor.

That is a short term situation at best. MAGA wants them out. This is only step one. Step two will be demanding adjustments that benefit whites.

What is a short term situation? Affirmative action has no pathway back into legality without a constitutional amendment.

And what adjustment would only benefit whites?

Nonsense. Change the supreme Court and you change the rulings. Ask any American woman.

No court is going to go back down the blind alley of saying that some forms of racial discrimination are permissible under the 14th amendment for the sake of something as notional and theoretical as "the benefits of diversity in education"

I think that is a pretty naive reading of things. Especially given the behavior of the current court where one side has a lot of “flexibly” regarding precedence and accepted law.

Roe v wade was never "accepted" law. It's been challenged regularly since it was first decided. Same with Affirmative Action.

Right now the supreme court is the only thing standing between president trump and king trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the Asian population has jumped significantly as has the SAT median so that should make the government happy.

The MAGAs definitely tipped the scales in favor of Asians and Indians.

It's funny how people like you see the removal of discrimination as conferring favor.

That is a short term situation at best. MAGA wants them out. This is only step one. Step two will be demanding adjustments that benefit whites.

What is a short term situation? Affirmative action has no pathway back into legality without a constitutional amendment.

And what adjustment would only benefit whites?

Nonsense. Change the supreme Court and you change the rulings. Ask any American woman.

No court is going to go back down the blind alley of saying that some forms of racial discrimination are permissible under the 14th amendment for the sake of something as notional and theoretical as "the benefits of diversity in education"

I think that is a pretty naive reading of things. Especially given the behavior of the current court where one side has a lot of “flexibly” regarding precedence and accepted law.

Roe v wade was never "accepted" law. It's been challenged regularly since it was first decided. Same with Affirmative Action.

Right now the supreme court is the only thing standing between president trump and king trump.

Barely and reluctantly especially for a couple of the more corrupt justices. The Roberts court has been such a shit show for the past decade that with Manchin and Sinema gone it has become inevitable that the dems will pack the court if they get control of the house, senate and presidency at the same time. And, they would be justified in doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the Asian population has jumped significantly as has the SAT median so that should make the government happy.

The MAGAs definitely tipped the scales in favor of Asians and Indians.

It's funny how people like you see the removal of discrimination as conferring favor.

That is a short term situation at best. MAGA wants them out. This is only step one. Step two will be demanding adjustments that benefit whites.

Yet, liberal policy’s step one is to discriminate Asians for decades. It sure was “temporary “.

Asians weren't discriminated against. You're just not that good in a flexible system. Get over it.

You mean corrupt, as in the child raping and baby eating white culture disclosed in the Epstein files?

Maybe just avoid Harvard all together.

I think the point is Harvard isn’t OWNED by white liberals, although they’re currently in control. It’s like asking non white people to leave America if they don’t like it. The answer is NO, because this is not your land.

Who owns Harvard?

The Harvard Corporation is a 501(c)(3) and the owner of all of Harvard University's assets and real property.[5]

As a governing board, the Corporation traditionally functioned as an outside body whose members were not involved in the institution's daily life, meeting instead periodically to consult with the day-to-day head, the president of Harvard University, whom it appoints, and who also serves as a member. The Corporation is self-perpetuating, appointing new members to fill its own vacancies as they arise.

ok Fine. It is a 501(c) corporation like lots of other educational and religious institutions.

Just boycott it if you don't like the way they do business. If I dont like The YMCA, I can go to a different gym. If I dont like the Catholic Church, I can go to a different one. If I don't like Saint Jude, or NRP, or Duke, or Purdue, or Harvard, I can patronize or donate to a different organization.

Huh? What a brain dead solution! A better way is always to try to change it instead of quitting. Again, it’s NOT yours.

There are literally thousands of institutions of higher learning out here. I think you could find one to your liking.

All the selective ones are engaging in the same type of racial discrimination.

People are getting really sick of your little Asian fever dreams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the Asian population has jumped significantly as has the SAT median so that should make the government happy.

The MAGAs definitely tipped the scales in favor of Asians and Indians.

It's funny how people like you see the removal of discrimination as conferring favor.

That is a short term situation at best. MAGA wants them out. This is only step one. Step two will be demanding adjustments that benefit whites.

What is a short term situation? Affirmative action has no pathway back into legality without a constitutional amendment.

And what adjustment would only benefit whites?

Nonsense. Change the supreme Court and you change the rulings. Ask any American woman.

No court is going to go back down the blind alley of saying that some forms of racial discrimination are permissible under the 14th amendment for the sake of something as notional and theoretical as "the benefits of diversity in education"

I think that is a pretty naive reading of things. Especially given the behavior of the current court where one side has a lot of “flexibly” regarding precedence and accepted law.

Roe v wade was never "accepted" law. It's been challenged regularly since it was first decided. Same with Affirmative Action.

Right now the supreme court is the only thing standing between president trump and king trump.

Barely and reluctantly especially for a couple of the more corrupt justices. The Roberts court has been such a shit show for the past decade that with Manchin and Sinema gone it has become inevitable that the dems will pack the court if they get control of the house, senate and presidency at the same time. And, they would be justified in doing so.

I don't think they could expand the court without immediately losing the next election and seeing the court packed the other way.
They are no more justified in expanding the court than Reagan would have been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the Asian population has jumped significantly as has the SAT median so that should make the government happy.

The MAGAs definitely tipped the scales in favor of Asians and Indians.

It's funny how people like you see the removal of discrimination as conferring favor.

That is a short term situation at best. MAGA wants them out. This is only step one. Step two will be demanding adjustments that benefit whites.

Yet, liberal policy’s step one is to discriminate Asians for decades. It sure was “temporary “.

Asians weren't discriminated against. You're just not that good in a flexible system. Get over it.

You mean corrupt, as in the child raping and baby eating white culture disclosed in the Epstein files?

Maybe just avoid Harvard all together.

I think the point is Harvard isn’t OWNED by white liberals, although they’re currently in control. It’s like asking non white people to leave America if they don’t like it. The answer is NO, because this is not your land.

Who owns Harvard?

The Harvard Corporation is a 501(c)(3) and the owner of all of Harvard University's assets and real property.[5]

As a governing board, the Corporation traditionally functioned as an outside body whose members were not involved in the institution's daily life, meeting instead periodically to consult with the day-to-day head, the president of Harvard University, whom it appoints, and who also serves as a member. The Corporation is self-perpetuating, appointing new members to fill its own vacancies as they arise.

ok Fine. It is a 501(c) corporation like lots of other educational and religious institutions.

Just boycott it if you don't like the way they do business. If I dont like The YMCA, I can go to a different gym. If I dont like the Catholic Church, I can go to a different one. If I don't like Saint Jude, or NRP, or Duke, or Purdue, or Harvard, I can patronize or donate to a different organization.

Huh? What a brain dead solution! A better way is always to try to change it instead of quitting. Again, it’s NOT yours.

There are literally thousands of institutions of higher learning out here. I think you could find one to your liking.

All the selective ones are engaging in the same type of racial discrimination.

People are getting really sick of your little Asian fever dreams.

By people, you mean you.

Most people are decent enough to admit that there was anti asian discrimination in the college admissions process at selective institutions. They might justify or rationalize the discrimination in order to avoid the "too many asians problem" but they would acknowledge the discrimination existed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too much politics should be on the other forums

Trump has politicized college admissions.

So here we are.

No. Colleges admissions have been politicized for decades, adopting all kinds of favoritism and racist policies. Trump is the one who’s trying to clean up this cesspool.

Maga has no interest in Harvard.

Who cares and why does it matter to the conversation? You don’t sound very bright.

THe poster is disputing that there is a political advantage to harassing Harvard.

There is a political advantage. Harvard is seen as the wellspring of critical (race) theory and DEI policies. Republicans will be able to make hay out of the affirmative action case for as long as colleges keep trying to discriminate on the basis of race. Racial discrimination is deeply unpopular and the DEI version is no more popular that the KKK version. It muddies the waters on whether anyone has the moral high ground.

Most Maga voters spend zero time caring about Harvard in any way.

They love watching Harvard get its comeuppance.

Not really. That comes up in conversation.... Never.

When it comes up in the news, they are pretty happy about it. There are zero downsides and plenty of political upside to beating up on harvard if you are a republican.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, the Asian population has jumped significantly as has the SAT median so that should make the government happy.

The MAGAs definitely tipped the scales in favor of Asians and Indians.

It's funny how people like you see the removal of discrimination as conferring favor.

That is a short term situation at best. MAGA wants them out. This is only step one. Step two will be demanding adjustments that benefit whites.

Yet, liberal policy’s step one is to discriminate Asians for decades. It sure was “temporary “.

Asians weren't discriminated against. You're just not that good in a flexible system. Get over it.

You mean corrupt, as in the child raping and baby eating white culture disclosed in the Epstein files?

Maybe just avoid Harvard all together.

I think the point is Harvard isn’t OWNED by white liberals, although they’re currently in control. It’s like asking non white people to leave America if they don’t like it. The answer is NO, because this is not your land.

Who owns Harvard?

The Harvard Corporation is a 501(c)(3) and the owner of all of Harvard University's assets and real property.[5]

As a governing board, the Corporation traditionally functioned as an outside body whose members were not involved in the institution's daily life, meeting instead periodically to consult with the day-to-day head, the president of Harvard University, whom it appoints, and who also serves as a member. The Corporation is self-perpetuating, appointing new members to fill its own vacancies as they arise.

ok Fine. It is a 501(c) corporation like lots of other educational and religious institutions.

Just boycott it if you don't like the way they do business. If I dont like The YMCA, I can go to a different gym. If I dont like the Catholic Church, I can go to a different one. If I don't like Saint Jude, or NRP, or Duke, or Purdue, or Harvard, I can patronize or donate to a different organization.

Huh? What a brain dead solution! A better way is always to try to change it instead of quitting. Again, it’s NOT yours.

There are literally thousands of institutions of higher learning out here. I think you could find one to your liking.

All the selective ones are engaging in the same type of racial discrimination.

People are getting really sick of your little Asian fever dreams.

I always knew you’re a racist pig. Asians are gonna dominate your dumb ass even more in the future. Enjoy!

[Anonymous]

So many sad Harvard rejects here. It wall always live rent free in your minds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many sad Harvard rejects here. It wall always live rent free in your minds.

Yes, I was rejected. And so were my kids. Doesn’t change the validity of my view. They get too much money and I want it moved to others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many sad Harvard rejects here. It wall always live rent free in your minds.

You’re trying to move the goal post. What does that have anything do with the fact that Harvard practiced racial discrimination and got stopped by Trump?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too much politics should be on the other forums

Trump has politicized college admissions.

So here we are.

No. Colleges admissions have been politicized for decades, adopting all kinds of favoritism and racist policies. Trump is the one who’s trying to clean up this cesspool.

Maga has no interest in Harvard.

Who cares and why does it matter to the conversation? You don’t sound very bright.

THe poster is disputing that there is a political advantage to harassing Harvard.

There is a political advantage. Harvard is seen as the wellspring of critical (race) theory and DEI policies. Republicans will be able to make hay out of the affirmative action case for as long as colleges keep trying to discriminate on the basis of race. Racial discrimination is deeply unpopular and the DEI version is no more popular that the KKK version. It muddies the waters on whether anyone has the moral high ground.

Most Maga voters spend zero time caring about Harvard in any way.

They love watching Harvard get its comeuppance.

Not really. That comes up in conversation.... Never.

When it comes up in the news, they are pretty happy about it. There are zero downsides and plenty of political upside to beating up on harvard if you are a republican.

Harvard derangement syndrome. Find something better to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many sad Harvard rejects here. It wall always live rent free in your minds.

You’re trying to move the goal post. What does that have anything do with the fact that Harvard practiced racial discrimination and got stopped by Trump?

Harvard has been doing Harvard for hundreds of years. It will be continuing on long long after Trump and his minions are gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many sad Harvard rejects here. It wall always live rent free in your minds.

You’re trying to move the goal post. What does that have anything do with the fact that Harvard practiced racial discrimination and got stopped by Trump?

Harvard has been doing Harvard for hundreds of years. It will be continuing on long long after Trump and his minions are gone.

Harvard hasn’t “been Harvard” in any fixed sense; its admissions policies, political stance have changed repeatedly under legal and social pressure. Longevity doesn’t justify a specific practice, and the Supreme Court ruled this one crossed constitutional limits. Unconstitutional is unconstitutional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many sad Harvard rejects here. It wall always live rent free in your minds.

You’re trying to move the goal post. What does that have anything do with the fact that Harvard practiced racial discrimination and got stopped by Trump?

Harvard has been doing Harvard for hundreds of years. It will be continuing on long long after Trump and his minions are gone.

Harvard hasn’t “been Harvard” in any fixed sense; its admissions policies, political stance have changed repeatedly under legal and social pressure. Longevity doesn’t justify a specific practice, and the Supreme Court ruled this one crossed constitutional limits. Unconstitutional is unconstitutional.

Until the court changes its ruling again. Right now, no affirmative action for Harvard or anywhere else. Yet they still spend time and energy and our tax money beating on Harvard. Find something better to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many sad Harvard rejects here. It wall always live rent free in your minds.

You’re trying to move the goal post. What does that have anything do with the fact that Harvard practiced racial discrimination and got stopped by Trump?

Harvard has been doing Harvard for hundreds of years. It will be continuing on long long after Trump and his minions are gone.

Harvard hasn’t “been Harvard” in any fixed sense; its admissions policies, political stance have changed repeatedly under legal and social pressure. Longevity doesn’t justify a specific practice, and the Supreme Court ruled this one crossed constitutional limits. Unconstitutional is unconstitutional.

Until the court changes its ruling again. Right now, no affirmative action for Harvard or anywhere else. Yet they still spend time and energy and our tax money beating on Harvard. Find something better to do.

Because they need evidence Harvard is complying with the ruling. Harvard hasn’t been cooperating, which is suspicious.