Black Student Enrollment More Than Doubles in Harvard Law’s Class of 2028

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the
"good" comments. Why is this good? Would people on DCUM applaud if more ethnically korean or mexican applicants had an increase in acceptances?

Yes you do. Black students are historically underrepresented, which is at least partially caused by and contributes to persisting inequality. If you have more black students qualify for admissions in a post-affirmative action world, it suggests that maybe there is some hope for raising the Black community up to the level of other Americans and reducing barriers to success. But you knew this already..

We still don't have data on who is getting admitted, is it recent Black immigrants, or Black Americans pre civil war

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the
"good" comments. Why is this good? Would people on DCUM applaud if more ethnically korean or mexican applicants had an increase in acceptances?

Yes you do. Black students are historically underrepresented, which is at least partially caused by and contributes to persisting inequality. If you have more black students qualify for admissions in a post-affirmative action world, it suggests that maybe there is some hope for raising the Black community up to the level of other Americans and reducing barriers to success. But you knew this already..

That's an argument for providing more legal education to more Black people, not inviting more Black people to an academic program they aren't prepared to succeed in.

UDC Law is 45% Black.
Growing that school without playing games with admissions process would generate more Black lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good to see.

Yes, wonderful that they have a stellar role model like Prof. Claudine Gay.

She doesn't work at Harvard Law you racist buffoon

But she was bullied out of job, that she was extremely good at and widely respected for, by evil racists who were cheered on by racist buffoons.

[Anonymous]

This is very good news. We need a lot more minorities across the board in the law field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good to see.

Yes, wonderful that they have a stellar role model like Prof. Claudine Gay.

She doesn't work at Harvard Law you racist buffoon

But she was bullied out of job, that she was extremely good at and widely respected for, by evil racists who were cheered on by racist buffoons.

No. She wasn’t. I’m a Harvard grad. She was unqualified to be appointed President. Look at her credentials (few legit remain). She had only minor pieces published in her field and zero administrative experience. The Board of overseers, which is part of the Corporation, wanted a first black female. Questions were raised at the beginning: why is this person with no experience at college or university management experience was put forth. We know why. And she failed miserably at being absent and non-committal when the first post-Columbia protests began. She failed miserably in front of Congress. And she placated those few pieces she had published. The University wants her to go away. And she wasn’t bullied. She resigned when the plagiarism came to light.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top tier Black students are usually better at logic and reasoning , than math , science. Which are things you need to be a good lawyer

Cite please. And I went to Harvard Law.

I mean black people make better lawyers than Asians

Oh, now I need a cite for that one, too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous[b wrote:]Impossible to understand without knowing the median LSAT and GPA for this group. I sure hope it means more black students were as qualified as their non-black peers though.

[/b]

My son is in that class. That class has a 4.0 GPA at the 75th percentile, a 3.96 for the median and a 3.89 at the bottom 25th percentile. LSATs are 176, 174, 171. But, you’re right, we don’t know the scores of the admitted black students. What I can tell is that the black students in my class could not pass the California bar even after multiple attempts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]Impossible to understand without knowing the median LSAT and GPA for this group. I sure hope it means more black students were as qualified as their non-black peers though.

[/b]

My son is in that class. That class has a 4.0 GPA at the 75th percentile, a 3.96 for the median and a 3.89 at the bottom 25th percentile. LSATs are 176, 174, 171. But, you’re right, we don’t know the scores of the admitted black students. What I can tell is that the black students in my class could not pass the California bar even after multiple attempts

Black Harvard grads law students are sourced from the top black students in the country, the most dangerous place for a black person is in the mind of a conservative

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the
"good" comments. Why is this good? Would people on DCUM applaud if more ethnically korean or mexican applicants had an increase in acceptances?

Yes you do. Black students are historically underrepresented, which is at least partially caused by and contributes to persisting inequality. If you have more black students qualify for admissions in a post-affirmative action world, it suggests that maybe there is some hope for raising the Black community up to the level of other Americans and reducing barriers to success. But you knew this already..

That's an argument for providing more legal education to more Black people, not inviting more Black people to an academic program they aren't prepared to succeed in.

UDC Law is 45% Black.
Growing that school without playing games with admissions process would generate more Black lawyers.

This is very racist. We are post affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the
"good" comments. Why is this good? Would people on DCUM applaud if more ethnically korean or mexican applicants had an increase in acceptances?

Because we like black people and want to see them
Succeed especially over the corrupt heartless idiots running the Trump administration.

[Anonymous]

Must be due to merit, just like an increase in the share of Asian students would be in this post-affirmative action world. That was the whole argument that critics of affirmative action made, right? That admissions should reflect merit?

I know you’re not so biased as to be working backward from the result to infer that more black students in the class de facto means merit must have been circumvented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good to see.

Yes, wonderful that they have a stellar role model like Prof. Claudine Gay.

She doesn't work at Harvard Law you racist buffoon

But she was bullied out of job, that she was extremely good at and widely respected for, by evil racists who were cheered on by racist buffoons.

All false.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the
"good" comments. Why is this good? Would people on DCUM applaud if more ethnically korean or mexican applicants had an increase in acceptances?

Yes you do. Black students are historically underrepresented, which is at least partially caused by and contributes to persisting inequality. If you have more black students qualify for admissions in a post-affirmative action world, it suggests that maybe there is some hope for raising the Black community up to the level of other Americans and reducing barriers to success. But you knew this already..

That's an argument for providing more legal education to more Black people, not inviting more Black people to an academic program they aren't prepared to succeed in.

UDC Law is 45% Black.
Growing that school without playing games with admissions process would generate more Black lawyers.

They want the pedigree to give the illusion of parity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good to see.

Yes, wonderful that they have a stellar role model like Prof. Claudine Gay.

She doesn't work at Harvard Law you racist buffoon

But she was bullied out of job, that she was extremely good at and widely respected for, by evil racists who were cheered on by racist buffoons.

All false.

+1. Completely false

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all the
"good" comments. Why is this good? Would people on DCUM applaud if more ethnically korean or mexican applicants had an increase in acceptances?

Yes you do. Black students are historically underrepresented, which is at least partially caused by and contributes to persisting inequality. If you have more black students qualify for admissions in a post-affirmative action world, it suggests that maybe there is some hope for raising the Black community up to the level of other Americans and reducing barriers to success. But you knew this already..

That's an argument for providing more legal education to more Black people, not inviting more Black people to an academic program they aren't prepared to succeed in.

UDC Law is 45% Black.
Growing that school without playing games with admissions process would generate more Black lawyers.

Black people don't want to attend HBCU, they are seen ass sub standard, and lack resources in many areas