Federal judge rules that admissions changes at nation’s top public school discriminate against Asian

[Anonymous]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that
have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have
scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to
compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that
have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have
scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to
compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

That's nonsense. Have you ever heard of Texas? Or California?

SMH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that
have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have
scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to
compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

“It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.” Infuriating that the court shamelessly invokes this quote. One look at FCPS boundaries and demographics by pyramid shows that de facto segregation by race is omnipresent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/petitions-were-watching/


Lots of cases listed, no TJ. Is there any source that thinks the court will actually grant cert?

We already know 3 conservative Justices voted to grant stay already with the earlier TRO matter so only 1 more out of 3 remaining conservative justices is all that is necessary. Likely to be grated cert.

It will be Robertis since he wants to further clarify the boundaries of what is not permitted and what is permitted under the Harvard/UNC case's holding.

Interesting analysis. How do you square it with his vote not to grant the emergency stay, allowing a potentially discriminatory process to continue for an additional 2-3 years?

The Harvard case had NOT been decided and announced by the SCOTUS at that time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that
have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have
scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to
compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

That's nonsense. Have you ever heard of Texas? Or California?

SMH

The Texas quota was the conservative response to ending affirmative action. It would be hilarious to see conservatives screw rural America (I wonder if the Virginia amicus brief would ever apply to UVA and VT- the appointed board has the power to remove preferences for geography) by getting geographic diversity banned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/petitions-were-watching/


Lots of cases listed, no TJ. Is there any source that thinks the court will actually grant cert?

We already know 3 conservative Justices voted to grant stay already with the earlier TRO matter so only 1 more out of 3 remaining conservative justices is all that is necessary. Likely to be grated cert.

It will be Robertis since he wants to further clarify the boundaries of what is not permitted and what is permitted under the Harvard/UNC case's holding.

Interesting analysis. How do you square it with his vote not to grant the emergency stay, allowing a potentially discriminatory process to continue for an additional 2-3 years?

The Harvard case had NOT been decided and announced by the SCOTUS at that time.

Is your argument then that the Court's reasoning in Coalition will rely heavily on SFFA? And that, therefore, the Chief Justice felt like it was okay for FCPS to continue allegedly discriminatory practices for 2-3 more classes just so that some precedent would exist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

That's crazy! It's a race-blind process that selects mainly Asians. Even the biggest beneficiary of the changes were low-income Asian families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that
have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have
scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to
compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

That's nonsense. Have you ever heard of Texas? Or California?

SMH

The Texas quota was the conservative response to ending affirmative action. It would be hilarious to see conservatives screw rural America (I wonder if the Virginia amicus brief would ever apply to UVA and VT- the appointed board has the power to remove preferences for geography) by getting geographic diversity banned.

This is an excellent point. Geographic diversity is important for many reasons, but it is also frequently the only way that kids from states and areas without significant education options are able to matriculate into elite or in many cases even average universities.

Outlawing it would absolutely crush the economies mostly red states - not immediately, but decades down the road - as parents realize that their kids will no longer have a shot to attend a decent college without moving to a (usually suburban and Democratic) area with better schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

That's crazy! It's a race-blind process that selects mainly Asians. Even the biggest beneficiary of the changes were low-income Asian families.

Scientific research has demonstrated that brainwashed individuals place greater trust in the information they've been fed, even when it contradicts what they see firsthand with their own eyes. Allow yourself the opportunity for self-reflection, to consider the possibility you are brainwashed. Perhaps then, maybe you'll be more inclined to question the narrative you've been fed and instead trust what your eyes see: Asian American student strength was suppressed from 73% to 54% in a single admissions cycle.

What took place was racial suppression, using deliberate racial balancing, and that's what is being called out in this amicus brief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

That's crazy! It's a race-blind process that selects mainly Asians. Even the biggest beneficiary of the changes were low-income Asian families.

Scientific research has demonstrated that brainwashed individuals place greater trust in the information they've been fed, even when it contradicts what they see firsthand with their own eyes. Allow yourself the opportunity for self-reflection, to consider the possibility you are brainwashed. Perhaps then, maybe you'll be more inclined to question the narrative you've been fed and instead trust what your eyes see: Asian American student strength was suppressed from 73% to 54% in a single admissions cycle.

What took place was racial suppression, using deliberate racial balancing, and that's what is being called out in this amicus brief.

The cognitive dissonance required to type this post is impressive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

That's crazy! It's a race-blind process that selects mainly Asians. Even the biggest beneficiary of the changes were low-income Asian families.

I know these people are nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

That's crazy! It's a race-blind process that selects mainly Asians. Even the biggest beneficiary of the changes were low-income Asian families.

Scientific research has demonstrated that brainwashed individuals place greater trust in the information they've been fed, even when it contradicts what they see firsthand with their own eyes. Allow yourself the opportunity for self-reflection, to consider the possibility you are brainwashed. Perhaps then, maybe you'll be more inclined to question the narrative you've been fed and instead trust what your eyes see: Asian American student strength was suppressed from 73% to 54% in a single admissions cycle.

What took place was racial suppression, using deliberate racial balancing, and that's what is being called out in this amicus brief.

+1 unconstitutional and illegal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-170/280287/20230922163615622_23-170%20Coalition%20for%20TJ%20v.%20FCSB%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Virginia%20and%2020%20Other%20States_final.pdf

The whole 1.5% quota idea was invented to reduce the Asian American students being admitted into TJ. This 1.5% notion doesn't hold water because the bottom five FCPS schools scoff at the unsolicited TJ offers being thrown their way, given that their schools provide little to no preparation for success in basic honors classes, let alone coping with the demanding rigor of TJ.

It was well knows that "Asian-American applicants are differently situated because they disproportionately attend a handful of gifted centers that have disproportionately high percentages of eligible applicants. These centers draw middle-school students from multiple schools who have scored highly on aptitude tests and offer them advanced classes. The 1.5% set-aside thus “disproportionately forces Asian-American students to compete against more eligible and interested applicants” attending these top gifted centers, rather than competing against all students."

Last page of amicus brief has the listing of Attorney Generals from 20 different states that are calling out this racial suppression of asian american students at FCPS. Appalling!

That's crazy! It's a race-blind process that selects mainly Asians. Even the biggest beneficiary of the changes were low-income Asian families.

Scientific research has demonstrated that brainwashed individuals place greater trust in the information they've been fed, even when it contradicts what they see firsthand with their own eyes. Allow yourself the opportunity for self-reflection, to consider the possibility you are brainwashed. Perhaps then, maybe you'll be more inclined to question the narrative you've been fed and instead trust what your eyes see: Asian American student strength was suppressed from 73% to 54% in a single admissions cycle.

What took place was racial suppression, using deliberate racial balancing, and that's what is being called out in this amicus brief.

+1 unconstitutional and illegal

Yes, a race-blind selection where outcomes favor Asians is suspicious and should be investigated for bias.