US Supreme Court Rules Against Affirmative Action in College Admissions

[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:Your doing yourselves a disservice by placing so much emphasis on admission to certain universities. What is your end result going to be? Couldn’t you achieve that same end at another prestigious school? I have seen it backfire where the parents and child brags about being accepted into an ivy, the kid makes it through, doesn’t fit in at all for numerous reasons, then is ‘only’ accepted at a state school for grad school/law school/med school. These people aren’t as successful as many who just started out at the state school or county college even.

who you talking to?

Anyone who believes they deserve to get accepted to a particular school, anyone who feels they deserve an Ivy League education over anyone else.

That is very rare.

Most people want more clear rules, fairness, and transparency.

It's not a game with rules. Many people here don't get that admissions is not about the individual (the "player"), it's about the institution and what they want in a class to express their values as well as academic prowess.
It's not like kids compete head to head on merits for these spots. AOs are looking to build a class. Sure, merit is a major factor, but diversity is also a big part of an educational environment to most institutions. Also, many here think test scores and grades solely determine merit, but that is not the case.

their vlues? like favoring ALDC?
Diversity is good, we can still have resonable rules, fairlness, transparency, and expectations.
They are not mutually exclusive.

But you may be disappointed, as the rules aren’t as black or white as you hope. And it shouldn’t have to be. This isn’t a competition, a who’s who of prepping the most….

My kids are all in colleges and all are very satisfied with the results, so I won't be disappointed.
This is competitive process. We don't need BS.

Why will be the end result though? if they become an engineer/surgeon/attny/anything, they will be working with colleagues from ‘lesser schools’ who will possibly be even working above them, in charge of them, this is reality. The competition is great everywhere.

What are you worrying about??

The real world. The real world doesn’t care where you went to school usually, it just doesn’t, unless you are in some niche category or something. I have seen first hand, people in my field from diverse backgrounds, having gone to diverse schools, now the end results would shock you. You wouldn’t always guess who becomes the most successful.

In my real world they care a lot. Just try getting a job in banking if you didn’t go to a target school. Guess which are the target schools. Yes the top 10.

Bankers are douches anyway. You don’t want to be a banker. Do something that’ll make a difference in someone’s life. Don’t be a douche.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your doing yourselves a disservice by placing so much emphasis on admission to certain universities. What is your end result going to be? Couldn’t you achieve that same end at another prestigious school? I have seen it backfire where the parents and child brags about being accepted into an ivy, the kid makes it through, doesn’t fit in at all for numerous reasons, then is ‘only’ accepted at a state school for grad school/law school/med school. These people aren’t as successful as many who just started out at the state school or county college even.

who you talking to?

Anyone who believes they deserve to get accepted to a particular school, anyone who feels they deserve an Ivy League education over anyone else.

That is very rare.

Most people want more clear rules, fairness, and transparency.

It's not a game with rules. Many people here don't get that admissions is not about the individual (the "player"), it's about the institution and what they want in a class to express their values as well as academic prowess.
It's not like kids compete head to head on merits for these spots. AOs are looking to build a class. Sure, merit is a major factor, but diversity is also a big part of an educational environment to most institutions. Also, many here think test scores and grades solely determine merit, but that is not the case.

their vlues? like favoring ALDC?
Diversity is good, we can still have resonable rules, fairlness, transparency, and expectations.
They are not mutually exclusive.

But you may be disappointed, as the rules aren’t as black or white as you hope. And it shouldn’t have to be. This isn’t a competition, a who’s who of prepping the most….

My kids are all in colleges and all are very satisfied with the results, so I won't be disappointed.
This is competitive process. We don't need BS.

Why will be the end result though? if they become an engineer/surgeon/attny/anything, they will be working with colleagues from ‘lesser schools’ who will possibly be even working above them, in charge of them, this is reality. The competition is great everywhere.

What are you worrying about??

The real world. The real world doesn’t care where you went to school usually, it just doesn’t, unless you are in some niche category or something. I have seen first hand, people in my field from diverse backgrounds, having gone to diverse schools, now the end results would shock you. You wouldn’t always guess who becomes the most successful.

So what?

So, it doesn’t matter where one goes to school.

There are people who don't agree with you entirely.
People have different opinions.

What does it have to do with reasonable rules, fairness, transparency, and expectations?

There are rules/fairness/transparency you just don’t agree with them. There are parameters, it’s not black or white. What is your hope for an end result warranting this clawing to the top so to speak?

yea right admission commitee giving negative points on the courage/likabilityy/kindness to Asians was tranparently reveal during the case.

Maybe it was warranted? Harvard didn’t like em.

Maybe slavery was warranted too?

Comparing not being accepted to Harvard to slavery? I have no words

Yea that's probably not a good comparison.
A good comparison to 'Asians are warranted to be not likable' is 'Blacks are warranted to be beatean and shot by police'

better?

Well now when you, or anyone of any color, isn’t accepted, you can’t blame race. Life isn’t fair I know.

Yea life isn't fair, and still have ALDC to blame.

I have accepted that and moved on decades ago.

I care about future of my country.

Me too, listen, go kick a$$ at any college and come out and make a difference. You are obviously too good for Harvard anyway. It’s Harvard’s loss.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your doing yourselves a disservice by placing so much emphasis on admission to certain universities. What is your end result going to be? Couldn’t you achieve that same end at another prestigious school? I have seen it backfire where the parents and child brags about being accepted into an ivy, the kid makes it through, doesn’t fit in at all for numerous reasons, then is ‘only’ accepted at a state school for grad school/law school/med school. These people aren’t as successful as many who just started out at the state school or county college even.

who you talking to?

Anyone who believes they deserve to get accepted to a particular school, anyone who feels they deserve an Ivy League education over anyone else.

That is very rare.

Most people want more clear rules, fairness, and transparency.

It's not a game with rules. Many people here don't get that admissions is not about the individual (the "player"), it's about the institution and what they want in a class to express their values as well as academic prowess.
It's not like kids compete head to head on merits for these spots. AOs are looking to build a class. Sure, merit is a major factor, but diversity is also a big part of an educational environment to most institutions. Also, many here think test scores and grades solely determine merit, but that is not the case.

their vlues? like favoring ALDC?
Diversity is good, we can still have resonable rules, fairlness, transparency, and expectations.
They are not mutually exclusive.

But you may be disappointed, as the rules aren’t as black or white as you hope. And it shouldn’t have to be. This isn’t a competition, a who’s who of prepping the most….

My kids are all in colleges and all are very satisfied with the results, so I won't be disappointed.
This is competitive process. We don't need BS.

Why will be the end result though? if they become an engineer/surgeon/attny/anything, they will be working with colleagues from ‘lesser schools’ who will possibly be even working above them, in charge of them, this is reality. The competition is great everywhere.

What are you worrying about??

The real world. The real world doesn’t care where you went to school usually, it just doesn’t, unless you are in some niche category or something. I have seen first hand, people in my field from diverse backgrounds, having gone to diverse schools, now the end results would shock you. You wouldn’t always guess who becomes the most successful.

So what?

So, it doesn’t matter where one goes to school.

There are people who don't agree with you entirely.
People have different opinions.

What does it have to do with reasonable rules, fairness, transparency, and expectations?

There are rules/fairness/transparency you just don’t agree with them. There are parameters, it’s not black or white. What is your hope for an end result warranting this clawing to the top so to speak?

yea right admission commitee giving negative points on the courage/likabilityy/kindness to Asians was tranparently reveal during the case.

Maybe it was warranted? Harvard didn’t like em.

Maybe slavery was warranted too?

Comparing not being accepted to Harvard to slavery? I have no words

Yea that's probably not a good comparison.
A good comparison to 'Asians are warranted to be not likable' is 'Blacks are warranted to be beatean and shot by police'

better?

Well now when you, or anyone of any color, isn’t accepted, you can’t blame race. Life isn’t fair I know.

Yea life isn't fair, and still have ALDC to blame.

I have accepted that and moved on decades ago.

I care about future of my country.

Me too, listen, go kick a$$ at any college and come out and make a difference. You are obviously too good for Harvard anyway. It’s Harvard’s loss.

I already graduated. My kids are all in colleges.

Fair competition is fundamental and vital to the health and future of the country.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your doing yourselves a disservice by placing so much emphasis on admission to certain universities. What is your end result going to be? Couldn’t you achieve that same end at another prestigious school? I have seen it backfire where the parents and child brags about being accepted into an ivy, the kid makes it through, doesn’t fit in at all for numerous reasons, then is ‘only’ accepted at a state school for grad school/law school/med school. These people aren’t as successful as many who just started out at the state school or county college even.

who you talking to?

Anyone who believes they deserve to get accepted to a particular school, anyone who feels they deserve an Ivy League education over anyone else.

That is very rare.

Most people want more clear rules, fairness, and transparency.

It's not a game with rules. Many people here don't get that admissions is not about the individual (the "player"), it's about the institution and what they want in a class to express their values as well as academic prowess.
It's not like kids compete head to head on merits for these spots. AOs are looking to build a class. Sure, merit is a major factor, but diversity is also a big part of an educational environment to most institutions. Also, many here think test scores and grades solely determine merit, but that is not the case.

their vlues? like favoring ALDC?
Diversity is good, we can still have resonable rules, fairlness, transparency, and expectations.
They are not mutually exclusive.

But you may be disappointed, as the rules aren’t as black or white as you hope. And it shouldn’t have to be. This isn’t a competition, a who’s who of prepping the most….

My kids are all in colleges and all are very satisfied with the results, so I won't be disappointed.
This is competitive process. We don't need BS.

Why will be the end result though? if they become an engineer/surgeon/attny/anything, they will be working with colleagues from ‘lesser schools’ who will possibly be even working above them, in charge of them, this is reality. The competition is great everywhere.

What are you worrying about??

The real world. The real world doesn’t care where you went to school usually, it just doesn’t, unless you are in some niche category or something. I have seen first hand, people in my field from diverse backgrounds, having gone to diverse schools, now the end results would shock you. You wouldn’t always guess who becomes the most successful.

So what?

So, it doesn’t matter where one goes to school.

There are people who don't agree with you entirely.
People have different opinions.

What does it have to do with reasonable rules, fairness, transparency, and expectations?

There are rules/fairness/transparency you just don’t agree with them. There are parameters, it’s not black or white. What is your hope for an end result warranting this clawing to the top so to speak?

yea right admission commitee giving negative points on the courage/likabilityy/kindness to Asians was tranparently reveal during the case.

Maybe it was warranted? Harvard didn’t like em.

Maybe slavery was warranted too?

Comparing not being accepted to Harvard to slavery? I have no words

Yea that's probably not a good comparison.
A good comparison to 'Asians are warranted to be not likable' is 'Blacks are warranted to be beatean and shot by police'

better?

Well now when you, or anyone of any color, isn’t accepted, you can’t blame race. Life isn’t fair I know.

Yea life isn't fair, and still have ALDC to blame.

I have accepted that and moved on decades ago.

I care about future of my country.

Me too, listen, go kick a$$ at any college and come out and make a difference. You are obviously too good for Harvard anyway. It’s Harvard’s loss.

I already graduated. My kids are all in colleges.

Fair competition is fundamental and vital to the health and future of the country.

Well, you can receive a quality education at most universities, if you’re willing to put in the work. You aren’t after a quality education though, you want the bragging rights, the networking etc. After the Harvard rejects graduate from their respective lesser schools, Harvard will see what they missed by denying you entry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who feel entitled to attend any particular school they want are inherently unlikeable to some people. It’s a spoiled brat mindset.

In other words, asking for equal treatment = entitled? Must be dependent on who is asking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel entitled to attend any particular school they want are inherently unlikeable to some people. It’s a spoiled brat mindset.

Those must be ALDC

+1000

[Anonymous]

What is ALDC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is ALDC?

Athletes Legacy Donors Child of faculty

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is ALDC?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/study-harvard-finds-43-percent-white-students-are-legacy-athletes-n1060361

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This judgement from the court is very confusing.

1) It DID NOT OVERRULE GRUTTER which prohibits quotas and prevents insulation of applicants from certain racial classes from competition, but allowed diversity as a compelling interest

2) All the decision says is that Harvard's program and UNC's program as constituted violate the 14th Amendment, the same way the court ruled in Gratz vs Bollinger in 2003 and yet race based Affirmative Action did not stop after Gratz

3) It leaves open that a newly constituted Affirmative Action program "could" pass strict scrutiny by making sure that they
(a) don't have quotas,
(b) show a compelling interest that does not include diversity, righting past discrimination or rectifying historic deficit of certain races in a university,
(c) they don't use race as a stereo type and
(d) they have a clear end date.

I am going to get Harvard and other elites are going to come up with some other scheme to try to needle this thread

Thomas's concurrence explicitly stated the court is overturning Grutter.

Harvard needs a real paying attorney. It relied too much on free legal advice it was reading from anonymous forums.

Read his opinion carefully. He added a caveat,
"Grutter is, for all intents and purposes, overruled" It's not REALLY overruled

Plus that's his individual opinion. The majority opinion, did not say this at all. Only the majority ruling is binding

Plus there court arrived at the same conclusion in Gratz, that University of Michigan's undergraduate policy violated the 14 th amendment, just like they have ruled on Harvard and UNC. The Gratz decision from 2003 did not stop race based Affirmative Action

All any University has to do, is say, it's changed it's policy slightly and carry on as if nothing has happened. Then somebody will sue after a few years.

By the time the case lands again in the Supreme Court it will be almost a decade. SFFA, First filled in 2014.

At that time if the court is still conservative, they can again rule that the new policy is also unconstitutional. The university already gets 10 years to keep doing what it is doing.


Then they go back and try again. And so it goes.

This decision is not what the media is making it out to be. It's a nothing burger. NOTHING WILL CHANGE.

Number of Asian students has been increasing already.

+1

Harvard just got b slapped, and it knew it was coming. Asian presence has been increasing for the past few years.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/harvard-admits-record-number-asian-american-students-black-latino-admi-rcna77923

Number of Asian students increasing means what exactly in this context ? I I'll tell you what it means . Harvard class of 2027 is made up of something like 1,942 students for an applicant pool of 59,000+. Acceptance is 3.7%. Harvard will CONTINUE to admit those you've come to believe didn't earn it despite failing to prove it , repeatedly.

As such, all the ' i have a perfect SAT , why am I not at Harvard crowd' will still have to contend with a 97% rejection rate. Keep in mind that of those admitted, about 137 are international students.So, you're left with a little over 1,000 spots for American students exclusively, of which close to half will be legacies. Good luck !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This judgement from the court is very confusing.

1) It DID NOT OVERRULE GRUTTER which prohibits quotas and prevents insulation of applicants from certain racial classes from competition, but allowed diversity as a compelling interest

2) All the decision says is that Harvard's program and UNC's program as constituted violate the 14th Amendment, the same way the court ruled in Gratz vs Bollinger in 2003 and yet race based Affirmative Action did not stop after Gratz

3) It leaves open that a newly constituted Affirmative Action program "could" pass strict scrutiny by making sure that they
(a) don't have quotas,
(b) show a compelling interest that does not include diversity, righting past discrimination or rectifying historic deficit of certain races in a university,
(c) they don't use race as a stereo type and
(d) they have a clear end date.

I am going to get Harvard and other elites are going to come up with some other scheme to try to needle this thread

Thomas's concurrence explicitly stated the court is overturning Grutter.

Harvard needs a real paying attorney. It relied too much on free legal advice it was reading from anonymous forums.

Read his opinion carefully. He added a caveat,
"Grutter is, for all intents and purposes, overruled" It's not REALLY overruled

Plus that's his individual opinion. The majority opinion, did not say this at all. Only the majority ruling is binding

Plus there court arrived at the same conclusion in Gratz, that University of Michigan's undergraduate policy violated the 14 th amendment, just like they have ruled on Harvard and UNC. The Gratz decision from 2003 did not stop race based Affirmative Action

All any University has to do, is say, it's changed it's policy slightly and carry on as if nothing has happened. Then somebody will sue after a few years.

By the time the case lands again in the Supreme Court it will be almost a decade. SFFA, First filled in 2014.

At that time if the court is still conservative, they can again rule that the new policy is also unconstitutional. The university already gets 10 years to keep doing what it is doing.


Then they go back and try again. And so it goes.

This decision is not what the media is making it out to be. It's a nothing burger. NOTHING WILL CHANGE.

Number of Asian students has been increasing already.

+1

Harvard just got b slapped, and it knew it was coming. Asian presence has been increasing for the past few years.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/harvard-admits-record-number-asian-american-students-black-latino-admi-rcna77923

Number of Asian students increasing means what exactly in this context ? I I'll tell you what it means . Harvard class of 2027 is made up of something like 1,942 students for an applicant pool of 59,000+. Acceptance is 3.7%. Harvard will CONTINUE to admit those you've come to believe didn't earn it despite failing to prove it , repeatedly.

As such, all the ' i have a perfect SAT , why am I not at Harvard crowd' will still have to contend with a 97% rejection rate. Keep in mind that of those admitted, about 137 are international students.So, you're left with a little over 1,000 spots for American students exclusively, of which close to half will be legacies. Good luck !

You sound mad at the simple fact

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This judgement from the court is very confusing.

1) It DID NOT OVERRULE GRUTTER which prohibits quotas and prevents insulation of applicants from certain racial classes from competition, but allowed diversity as a compelling interest

2) All the decision says is that Harvard's program and UNC's program as constituted violate the 14th Amendment, the same way the court ruled in Gratz vs Bollinger in 2003 and yet race based Affirmative Action did not stop after Gratz

3) It leaves open that a newly constituted Affirmative Action program "could" pass strict scrutiny by making sure that they
(a) don't have quotas,
(b) show a compelling interest that does not include diversity, righting past discrimination or rectifying historic deficit of certain races in a university,
(c) they don't use race as a stereo type and
(d) they have a clear end date.

I am going to get Harvard and other elites are going to come up with some other scheme to try to needle this thread

Thomas's concurrence explicitly stated the court is overturning Grutter.

Harvard needs a real paying attorney. It relied too much on free legal advice it was reading from anonymous forums.

Read his opinion carefully. He added a caveat,
"Grutter is, for all intents and purposes, overruled" It's not REALLY overruled

Plus that's his individual opinion. The majority opinion, did not say this at all. Only the majority ruling is binding

Plus there court arrived at the same conclusion in Gratz, that University of Michigan's undergraduate policy violated the 14 th amendment, just like they have ruled on Harvard and UNC. The Gratz decision from 2003 did not stop race based Affirmative Action

All any University has to do, is say, it's changed it's policy slightly and carry on as if nothing has happened. Then somebody will sue after a few years.

By the time the case lands again in the Supreme Court it will be almost a decade. SFFA, First filled in 2014.

At that time if the court is still conservative, they can again rule that the new policy is also unconstitutional. The university already gets 10 years to keep doing what it is doing.


Then they go back and try again. And so it goes.

This decision is not what the media is making it out to be. It's a nothing burger. NOTHING WILL CHANGE.

Number of Asian students has been increasing already.

+1

Harvard just got b slapped, and it knew it was coming. Asian presence has been increasing for the past few years.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/harvard-admits-record-number-asian-american-students-black-latino-admi-rcna77923

Number of Asian students increasing means what exactly in this context ? I I'll tell you what it means . Harvard class of 2027 is made up of something like 1,942 students for an applicant pool of 59,000+. Acceptance is 3.7%. Harvard will CONTINUE to admit those you've come to believe didn't earn it despite failing to prove it , repeatedly.

As such, all the ' i have a perfect SAT , why am I not at Harvard crowd' will still have to contend with a 97% rejection rate. Keep in mind that of those admitted, about 137 are international students.So, you're left with a little over 1,000 spots for American students exclusively, of which close to half will be legacies. Good luck !

You must be an ALDC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Violates Equal Protection Clause.

Opinion by Chief justice Roberts

I’m a white person.

Discrimination against Asian Americans is terrible, and the Supreme Court is right to oppose that.

But efforts to figure out how to make sure there are some Black students around are critical for the other students.

The idea that campus diversity exists solely to help the URM kids is absurd. Campus diversity exists because students need to learn to work with all kinds of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Violates Equal Protection Clause.

Opinion by Chief justice Roberts

I’m a white person.

Discrimination against Asian Americans is terrible, and the Supreme Court is right to oppose that.

But efforts to figure out how to make sure there are some Black students around are critical for the other students.

The idea that campus diversity exists solely to help the URM kids is absurd. Campus diversity exists because students need to learn to work with all kinds of people.

Have you thought about moving to the diversity part of DMV? It will be a good educational experience for you and your kids.

Is that supposed to be a dig? Not PP but were you coddled growing up? I’m white, not from DC but grew up in a poor neighborhood, grew up around URMs and tons of other poor white kids like me. I attended college in the ghetto. I work in an inner city now. I have the ability to converse and relate to anyone. This site is just so eye opening and hilarious to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Violates Equal Protection Clause.

Opinion by Chief justice Roberts

I’m a white person.

Discrimination against Asian Americans is terrible, and the Supreme Court is right to oppose that.

But efforts to figure out how to make sure there are some Black students around are critical for the other students.

The idea that campus diversity exists solely to help the URM kids is absurd. Campus diversity exists because students need to learn to work with all kinds of people.

Agree.