US Supreme Court Rules Against Affirmative Action in College Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Students can still discuss how race affected their lives in college essays according to today's US Supreme Court opinion.

College applications cannot have boxes to check indicating an applicant's race.

However, unlike many on this board kept arrogantly asserting, the end of Roberts' opinion clearly specifies that universities MAY NOT use essays or any other soft means to set up essentially the same system in effect today. That means they cannot use a "back door" to still discriminate via soft methods. So, sorry racist people on DCUM, your dreams are shattered lol

The above arrogant poster is wrong.

Applicants can still write about how their race affected them as an individual in their college app essays.

Students are free to discuss how race affected his or her life. However, the SCOTUS emphasis is, "despite the dissent's assertion to the contrary, universities may not... establish ... the regime we hold unlawful today."
So, there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From Columbia University:

"higher education will take five years to fully adjust to the new legal landscape, as committees and task forces—already in place at many schools—explore ways to employ income levels, socioeconomic factors and other race-neutral factors to maintain diversity."

Folks...us white people are the winners. Do you think the group that brought the cases to the Supreme Court care about Asians?

doesn't matter what you think. getting rid of AA will give Asian students (more) equal chances to be admitted. If white students are better, they deserve it.

Not exactly. Going forward, Asian students will no longer benefit from what is currently a very strong URM advantage at top 20 SLACs and underrepresented Asian subgroups (e.g., from Myanmar) will no longer have a URM hook at Ivies.

The lawsuits were brought by a white supremacist legal organization, so the idea that Asians were ever in a position to gain something meaningful is frankly preposterous. The American right-wing, filled as it is with anti-Asian bigots, stoked anger among Asian-American parents and students as a way of entrenching white privilege. Facts.

Yes, this. The white population will increase at elite schools and all other races will decline. This organization lost when a white person was the face of the lawsuit so they found Asians to be the front. Worked like a charm.

[Anonymous]

why so many people are so devastated that colleges can't use race as a factor? The Asian students are not asking for preferential treatment, just equal treatment. And college admission was never solely test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Do colleges like whinining about your race?

Yes and your lgbtq status

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't an applicant's name convey race in a vast, vast number of cases? It must be about 90% accurate.

Yes, of course. And people are still free to talk about their backgrounds in their essays. And AOs are still able to chose with their own inherent set of biases, so long as those biases cannot be proven.

It was proved this time.

It can be proved next time.

Hellow to huge law suits.

Is it worth it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From Columbia University:

"higher education will take five years to fully adjust to the new legal landscape, as committees and task forces—already in place at many schools—explore ways to employ income levels, socioeconomic factors and other race-neutral factors to maintain diversity."

Folks...us white people are the winners. Do you think the group that brought the cases to the Supreme Court care about Asians?

doesn't matter what you think. getting rid of AA will give Asian students (more) equal chances to be admitted. If white students are better, they deserve it.

Not exactly. Going forward, Asian students will no longer benefit from what is currently a very strong URM advantage at top 20 SLACs and underrepresented Asian subgroups (e.g., from Myanmar) will no longer have a URM hook at Ivies.

The lawsuits were brought by a white supremacist legal organization, so the idea that Asians were ever in a position to gain something meaningful is frankly preposterous. The American right-wing, filled as it is with anti-Asian bigots, stoked anger among Asian-American parents and students as a way of entrenching white privilege. Facts.

Refugee status, parental education, and poverty are still allowable factors.

Doesn't matter how much white folks hate Asians, they can't force Asians to have lower academic ability.

"Facts."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand some of you. Are you upset that Supreme Court overturned a racist law?

This co-opting of the term "racist" is disingenuous. Did you read SC Justice Brown's dissent? There are reasonable disagreements with affirmative action (as well as reasonable justifications for it), but higher education is an important tool in addressing systemic racism in our society that disproportionately affects Black families given the history of slavery, Jim Crow laws and their residual effects in so many ways in present society (disproportionate policing and sentencing for similar crimes is just one example), but also impacts other URMs. Systemic racism will be harder to address without the types of affirmative action policies colleges developed.

So you think it was fair that Brown's kids would have gotten a bump based on race while a white or asian janitor's kid would be dinged for their race?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have sat in admissions rooms when decisions are being made.

We can now all sit in that same room, never mention race, never see race box-checks, and practically configure the same class of admittees.

The joke's on y'all.

Pretty sick you admit to practicing discrimination.

Lawsuits will start flying if AO do what that pp says. They will line up academic merit (scores/GPAs) and activities—-they can show they were discriminating based on race very easily.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From Columbia University:

"higher education will take five years to fully adjust to the new legal landscape, as committees and task forces—already in place at many schools—explore ways to employ income levels, socioeconomic factors and other race-neutral factors to maintain diversity."

Folks...us white people are the winners. Do you think the group that brought the cases to the Supreme Court care about Asians?

doesn't matter what you think. getting rid of AA will give Asian students (more) equal chances to be admitted. If white students are better, they deserve it.

Not exactly. Going forward, Asian students will no longer benefit from what is currently a very strong URM advantage at top 20 SLACs and underrepresented Asian subgroups (e.g., from Myanmar) will no longer have a URM hook at Ivies.

The lawsuits were brought by a white supremacist legal organization, so the idea that Asians were ever in a position to gain something meaningful is frankly preposterous. The American right-wing, filled as it is with anti-Asian bigots, stoked anger among Asian-American parents and students as a way of entrenching white privilege. Facts.

I’m pretty sure those are not “facts.”

They are, though. If you think elite institutions are suddenly going to become majority Asian, you're kidding yourself, because this country is too damn racist for that, too.

[Anonymous]

“.. The court’s three liberals dissented. Society “is not, and has never been, colorblind,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. “The Court ignores the dangerous consequences of an America where its leadership does not reflect the diversity of the People.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't an applicant's name convey race in a vast, vast number of cases? It must be about 90% accurate.

Yes, of course. And people are still free to talk about their backgrounds in their essays. And AOs are still able to chose with their own inherent set of biases, so long as those biases cannot be proven.

It was proved this time.

It can be proved next time.

Hellow to huge law suits.

Is it worth it?

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From Columbia University:

"higher education will take five years to fully adjust to the new legal landscape, as committees and task forces—already in place at many schools—explore ways to employ income levels, socioeconomic factors and other race-neutral factors to maintain diversity."

Folks...us white people are the winners. Do you think the group that brought the cases to the Supreme Court care about Asians?

doesn't matter what you think. getting rid of AA will give Asian students (more) equal chances to be admitted. If white students are better, they deserve it.

Not exactly. Going forward, Asian students will no longer benefit from what is currently a very strong URM advantage at top 20 SLACs and underrepresented Asian subgroups (e.g., from Myanmar) will no longer have a URM hook at Ivies.

The lawsuits were brought by a white supremacist legal organization, so the idea that Asians were ever in a position to gain something meaningful is frankly preposterous. The American right-wing, filled as it is with anti-Asian bigots, stoked anger among Asian-American parents and students as a way of entrenching white privilege. Facts.

+1

Prior to the ruling, Asian-American students had something of a hook based on the diversity they brought to many college environments. Not MIT, but a lot of national universities and liberal arts schools. That advantage is now gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree that this helps poor, rural whites. SC decision deplored admitting affluent blacks as a way to increase black enrollment. Kids of all races attending great schools in large MSAs are f*cked.

When you are accustomed to privilege, equality looks like oppression.

[Anonymous]

First of all, congratulations to the lawyers who pursued this. I don't agree with them, but I am in awe of their persistence -- a different court would have ruled differently -- but give these lawyers credit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America, F* yeah! Finally asians receive equal treatment under the law, not just "URM"

In synopsis I glanced, the Court summarized affirmative action is stereotypical, something to that effect, assuming all race thinks alike, are similar, etc. I guess affirmative action assumes certain people are just naturally challenged intellectually. This is a great day for URM, as they will no longer be assumed to be inferior. Those who make it will be presumed to be qualified. Finally, URMs will receive equal treatment under the law. It's a great day in America when all people, whites, brown, and blacks are judged by the content of their character.

That will take decades. Whether URM recognize it or not, damages from AA is long-lasting.

The damage isn't from AA - it's from the underlying culture of our country that considers POC as lesser. This existed before AA.