Supreme Court revisits Texas affirmative action in new case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its quite funny. So many white folks worried about the <5% brown people in majority white schools.

I have yet to hear a good argument against affirmative action. Most people think affirmative action means that "less qualified" minorities are purposely selected over "higher qualified" majority candidates. In theory this can happen, but in practice, its hardly the case. When it is the case, the rate of acceptance is no different then when a majority candidate with lesser scores are accepted over a superior majority candidates.

Why isn't anyone suing when this happens? I'll tell you why. Because the majority needs an enemy. Yesterday it was AAs, Jews, and hispanics. Today its all poor AAs families, Mexican immigrants, and anyone who identifies as Muslim. Whose it going to be tomorrow?

I think this is an argument against affirmative action. I've known people of all races who are smart, talented, and accomplished in their respective fields. However, as long as affirmative action stands, there will be those who question whether accomplishments were earned or whether there was a preference involved.

I recently saw a documentary that said in the not too distant future Hispanics would be the dominant ethnic group. While I'm not Hispanic, I would expect their rates of admission would be proportional and would not object to it being even higher. Some people here have argued that a merit based system could lead to a higher acceptance rate of Asians. So what? If they have worked hard to reach a higher level than their peers, they deserve more rewards. To deny them admission for fear they'll be over-represented is discrimination. (I'm not Asian either.)

I am, in fact, a member of the majority and I do not need an enemy. I don't care if you're white, black, or any color in between. You could be pea-green with purple polka dots and I wouldn't care (although I would be curious). Frankly, the whole idea of race seems arbitrary to me. If you believe in evolution, we all share a common ancestry going back to the apes. If you believe in the biblical account we all share common ancestors in Adam and Eve and more recently in Noah and his wife. Add to that millenia of migration and conquest and I think the issue of race become a lot less distinct. As for who the enemy is going to be tomorrow, it seems as noted above, that it may be a new minority, the "white folks", although it seems you've already declared us the enemy. I hope that others will be willing to look beyond the color of my skin and judge me and my children on our accomplishments.

As for the court case, I haven't studied it thoroughly, but my current understanding is that she did not meet the requirements for admission and that this was not a case where a preference came into play. She lost on her merits, or lack thereof, as was only fair.

Let me give my opinion as a AA woman. I don't care why you think I accomplished what I did. I never think about it. I'm still a lawyer, still passed the bar and am still your boss. You seem more concerned about my well being than I do.

Clarence Thomas is a perfect example of affirmative action gone wrong. He was clearly chosen because he was black and is clearly not qualified - especially since he can't seem to put 2 thoughts together. He replaced a true american hero, Thurgood Marshall, who was actually brilliant. It's shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action is not going anywhere.

Yes, it is. And America is so ready for it to be over. 50 years is long enough. Time to end institutionalized judging of people by the color of their skin, not the content of their character (and other qualifications).

Wow, 50 years to make up 400 years of racism. Oh, ok. America is not ready, white America is ready. Be clear. Don't use MLK's words out of context. Please read the entire speech. You clearly didn't, nor did you read any other body of MLK's work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, every time there is a thread like this, certain commenters always indicate that in a "meritocracy," all minorities would be less qualified. And that's why I can't really hear anything else that is said.

"ACT Scores by Race:

Year White Black Asian
2009 22.2 16.9 23.2
2010 22.3 16.9 23.4
2011 22.4 17.0 23.6
2012 22.4 17.0 23.6
2013 22.2 16.9 23.5

Source: ACT, Inc.

Were I white or Asian, with an ACT score of 20, and denied admission by my dream universities, I'd be very annoyed by those numbers.

Time for race-based discrimination to stop. A new injustice doesn't solve an older one.

The goal is diversity - in all forms. They don't want an entire class made up of white and asian men. Maybe those students are just plain boring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Have you looked at the specific numbers based on all high schools since they take 10 percent of all high schools. I am sure that many of those black students are coming from segregated schools that are not as good. Texas is not known for it's great educational high school system. Do you have the specific details? Did you take into account finances? Family situations? I am assuming that since you gave your opinion and stated some data, that your data should be more thorough.

Black students make up a whopping 4.4 percent. Damn, can't we have have anything? Is that 4.4 percent really affecting you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

Thank you. It's clear how you see this, it's all about me me me me me me me me me.

What others pointed above--and you completely ignored--is, what happened to the person whose spot you filled? If he or she deserved it more, based on academic scores and/ or socioeconomic background, why did it get to you? Why did YOU exclude HER, just because of her race?

Sorry, but I am not persuaded when college admissions want to play God.

"whose spot I filled"? Sounds a bit entitled doesn't it? Spots in universities aren't owed to any of us. Why was it her spot any more than mine? It wasn't like my university had said "these are the absolute admission requirements." Admissions are hardly playing God, they're making imperfect decisions, filling classes against some vision of what the class should look like and using criteria broader than a one-time score on a test to determine acceptance. The reality is, any white body who didn't get into my university probably got in somewhere else. If they had fortitude and/or access to opportunities (that their white skin might more likely afforded), then they're doing fine. There is a lot that is imperfect about the execution of AA, but you won't find me shedding tears over whites or Asian being excluded.

I know.

That's why it's about time for the Supreme Court to prevent universities to keep discriminating folks on the basis of race.

The beneficiaries of racism, or reverse racism, never complain. And why should they?

Fortunately, we live in a country with a color-blind Constitution.

Time to apply it.

We don't have a color blind constitution. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. The criminal justice system is not color blind. Lending is not color blind. Hiring is not color blind. You just want some institutions to be color blind. Fine, take away race based. Just make sure you take away legacy and athletic scholarships. You do realize that many black students can't use legacy (like myself) b/c my parents are old enough that they were not allowed to be admitted to their state institutions based on race. Are you willing to take all preferences away?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Mostly, we do just fine in our careers, given the same access to opportunities that others have (still not a given). I was an "Affirmative Action" baby at a top private university. Though I graduated at the top of my mostly Black high school class and had the 2nd highest SAT score in that class, I was about 120 points below the average SAT of my university. Even though the acceptance rates then (20 plus years ago) weren't as nearly as absurd as they are now, I surely got in with an AA boost (and probably got "points" for coming from my geographical region). My high school science background was woefully inadequate; I had not read novels in my English classes, I had not written research papers; I had not traveled to Europe like a lot of my peers; my father's friends and associates didn't represent an array of professions for me to aspire to or learn about... and none were wealthy. I struggled for sure and nearly flunked out. But slowly, with SUPPORT systems (from curiously enough, a number of white female professors), I did graduate in a field that I was interested in and afforded me some post-graduate options I might not have otherwise had. For sure I sometimes agonize had a I gone to a "slower paced" school that I might have been better positioned to get into a top graduate program (which I wasn't able to do with my record. Contrary to the notions, AA is not just opening the floodgates wide open). And maybe I could have been positioned for more lucrative positions earlier in my career. But in the end the experience was good for me in a couple of ways. 1). The mystery of supposed white (or Asian) supremacy was revealed. I saw what it took to compete in the highest of environments. 2) I got exposed to like-minded students of all races who had struggles similar to my own. 3) I discovered career and life options that I never knew existed. When I entered the work world, I realized, frankly, how largely mediocre the world is at large (and frankly, how mediocre white men still had the advantage over me, no matter where they went to school or if they went to school at all). I was and am a confident and fearless professional in part because I was thrown into the fire. What we don't get sometimes, is how such a meager allowance to right past wrongs causes so much rancor amongst detractors.

The "opportunity" you describe was provided to you over someone else (white/Asian) who had better qualifications and in case of Asians, someone who experienced the same discrimination and marginalization (as well as language/cultural issues on top) but worked hard to achieve academic success. Many Asians attend mediocre public schools and do not enjoy advantages upper-middle class students enjoy. Why should they be passed over based on race?

The AA population at UT is 4.4 percent. We really took spots away from someone else? Asians should be mad at white students, not black students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have you seen #StayMadAbby trending on Twitter?


Link: http://theculture.forharriet.com/2015/12/staymadabby-black-girls-are-clapping.html?m=1#axzz3tw710t6i

This is brilliant! I love it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Texas 75% of a class is admitted using class rank, eg top 10 percent (now it is less than 10 percent). The remaining 25% is admitted holistically including a long list of factors. Race is one of those factors. Ms Fisher, a double legacy, did not meet the 10 percent threshold. To me the facts matter.

In addition, test scores are not everything. I don't think going to a system where test scores are the only factors considered. People successfully matriculate from colleges without perfect or even high test scores.

Thanks for bringing it back to this. This case has bugged me for a while because her standing is so tenuous. She was not a competitive candidate to UT Austin, period, regardless of her race given aspects of her application. It was a reach school for her and she did not get in.

So you've concluded she was "not a competitive candidate" because she did not meet the top 10% threshold. But, minority applicants who did exactly as well as she did should be considered competitive specifically because the are not white? Really?

The top 10% policy is a transparent policy that has been on the books for years now, and the year Abigail Fisher applied, in accounted for 92% of the spots for the incoming class. The remaining 8% was admitted under "holistic review." As far as the rest of the holistic admits, if you look it up:

" Of the 841 students admitted under these criteria, 47 had worse AI/PAI scores (a combination of the holistic measure, grades, and test scores) than Fisher, and 42 of them were white. On the other end, UT rejected 168 black and Latino students with scores equal to or better than Fisher’s."
[url]
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/06/fisher_v_university_of_texas_the_supreme_court_might_just_gut_affirmative.html[/url]

So basically, white or not, she was in the middle of the pack for the holistic review admits, and getting into UT under the current admissions criteria was a total crapshoot.

This is the key - she sued over FIVE students. FIVE. 168 minority students with better scores got rejected. Should they have sued too, instead of accepting that UT was a reach and they didn't get in? She was WAY at the bottom of the pack and sued. Only 47 people accepted had worse scores than she did and 89% of them were white. OMG. I can't with the entitlement.

Ducks the question though. Fisher claims that those AI/PAI scores are themselves inappropriate because they take race into consideration when calculating the score. Her counterargument would be that some minority students with higher AI/PAI scores were in fact less qualified than she was based on grades and test scores and that they got a higher score largely because of their race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The average black student gets admission to the University of Texas with a score hundreds of points lower than white or Asian students.

Then upon entering the University of Texas, they often flounder. The graduation rate for UT as a whole is 78%, but for black students it is about 60%. And undoubtedly, the black students that do graduate do so with lower grades. Given either the lack of graduation or graduating with poor grades, these black students then face an uncertain career.

How is this good for anybody?

Have you looked at the specific numbers based on all high schools since they take 10 percent of all high schools. I am sure that many of those black students are coming from segregated schools that are not as good. Texas is not known for it's great educational high school system. Do you have the specific details? Did you take into account finances? Family situations? I am assuming that since you gave your opinion and stated some data, that your data should be more thorough.

Black students make up a whopping 4.4 percent. Damn, can't we have have anything? Is that 4.4 percent really affecting you?

It's not about taking away the 4.4%. In the Atlantic article it mentioned that the number of AA students actually graduating from UC Berkley stayed the same after they removed AA. So, what you seem to be fighting for is the right of unprepared AA candidates to flunk out of more prestigious universities vs. graduate from lesser universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they shouldn't even ask for race on the application. And if you can tell race by the first or last name, maybe that should be left anonymous as well.

Interesting concept. How would you feel if individuals using ID numbers only resulted in ONE ethnic group known for extensive test preparation becomes 95% of every top 20 college? Your snowflake would be excluded with their paltry SAT 2200. All hell would break loose, and you know this.

I'm not the pp you're referring to, and I am not a member of the ethnic group known for extensive test prep, but if the result was that they became the majority at elite institutions, then so be it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Be careful what you wish for. The California admissions system has resulted in increased Asian admissions. Not criticizing Asians, it's a fact that has occurred after picking based on scores.

So what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope all forms of racial preferences are eliminated in college admissions including legacies, preferences for athletes etc.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:asian people can't sue in the supreme court because suing an elite private college (on the basis it gets federal money) is a non-starter when suing public schools hasn't been successful.

grutter, bakke, gratz and every other major affirmative action case took public schools to trial.

an asian suing a public school on the basis of not getting in would be super embarrassing to the asian plaintiff and the asian community.

Nailed it.

Asians are suing UNC for racial discrimination in college admission.

Yeah I saw that it was filed around the same time a suit against Harvard was filed.

I'm surprised they found an asian plaintiff to sue UNC. They (the ones suing UNC) must be very twinkie or coconut types with progressive parents.

[Anonymous]

Why do you care if AA is there for public schools when privates have it and give a higher % of their classes for URM's?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I know.

That's why it's about time for the Supreme Court to prevent universities to keep discriminating folks on the basis of race.

The beneficiaries of racism, or reverse racism, never complain. And why should they?

Fortunately, we live in a country with a color-blind Constitution.

Time to apply it.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever read on DCUM. By far. Slavery was LITERALLY enshrined into the US Constitution.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

ARTICLE I, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 3