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

[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 didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

[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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

[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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

What percentage of FCPS is Asian American?

[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.

By this logic, no entity could ever seek to correct a pre-existing selection process that was discriminatory by replacing it with one that is not discriminatory.

Imagine an international corporation that had a de facto (unwritten) policy in place to hire 95% of its workers from the Western Hemisphere. Obviously, this corporation is discriminating against Asian applicants because the overwhelming majority of the global Asian population lives in the Eastern Hemisphere.

By your logic, that corporation eliminating that policy and committing to hire at least 30% of its workers from each Hemisphere would be an illegal act of racial balancing that placed an undue burden against, say, Hispanic people because the balance of them live in the Western Hemisphere. They might argue that they used to have the ability to compete for 95% of the spaces available but now they can only compete for 70%.

Your reasoning doesn't work, nor does PLF's.

[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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

Because the previous policy was, in practice, discriminatory against non-Asian students and in favor of Asian students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

What percentage of FCPS is Asian American?

Approximately 20%. And importantly, for the Class of 2025, 48% of applicants to that class were Asian-American and they had a better chance per applicant of being selected than any other racial demographic.

[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.

By this logic, no entity could ever seek to correct a pre-existing selection process that was discriminatory by replacing it with one that is not discriminatory.

Imagine an international corporation that had a de facto (unwritten) policy in place to hire 95% of its workers from the Western Hemisphere. Obviously, this corporation is discriminating against Asian applicants because the overwhelming majority of the global Asian population lives in the Eastern Hemisphere.

By your logic, that corporation eliminating that policy and committing to hire at least 30% of its workers from each Hemisphere would be an illegal act of racial balancing that placed an undue burden against, say, Hispanic people because the balance of them live in the Western Hemisphere. They might argue that they used to have the ability to compete for 95% of the spaces available but now they can only compete for 70%.

Your reasoning doesn't work, nor does PLF's.

That's been the flaw with the argument from day 1. A ruling in PLF's favor bars voluntary desegregation. Likewise, if a change in enrollment numbers under a new system is discriminatory, then any remedy is going to get hit with a lawsuit from whoever lost out. The whole process will become circular- the plaintiffs win and some change that makes the school more Asian is adopted by the board. Black/white/white hispanic students then sue under the same premise that PLF initially sued. They win for the same reasons. Any remedy then invites Asian applicants to sue again...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

What percentage of FCPS is Asian American?

The majority of students enrolled in advanced math and science courses across FCPS schools are Asian American. Any academic achievements that FCPS proudly highlights in their news releases, such as the recent one here (https://www.fcps.edu/news/fairfax-county-students-continue-outperform-sat-state-and-global-averages), owe a significant debt to the dedication and hard work of Asian American students.

However, it's glaringly evident that FCPS is stifling the progress of this diligent Asian American student body, as demonstrated by the reduction in their representation at TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

What percentage of FCPS is Asian American?

Approximately 20%. And importantly, for the Class of 2025, 48% of applicants to that class were Asian-American and they had a better chance per applicant of being selected than any other racial demographic.

+1

They had the highest acceptance rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

Because the previous policy was, in practice, discriminatory against non-Asian students and in favor of Asian students.

This is utter falsehood.

Asian American strength at TJ grew gradually from under 19% in 1983 at 3% per year, in small increments. There is no policy to be blamed, as the strength grew organically over the last 30 years without a helping had from the politicians, but by increasing asian american student interest and effort. But the FCPS used the battle axe, to chop their strength in just one admission cycle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

Because the previous policy was, in practice, discriminatory against non-Asian students and in favor of Asian students.

This is utter falsehood.

Asian American strength at TJ grew gradually from under 19% in 1983 at 3% per year, in small increments. There is no policy to be blamed, as the strength grew organically over the last 30 years without a helping had from the politicians, but by increasing asian american student interest and effort. But the FCPS used the battle axe, to chop their strength in just one admission cycle.

No, no axes were employed. The goal was to increase applications, numerically and geographically. And they succeeded.

Diversity of experience (not diversity of merit) is good for every student at TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

Because the previous policy was, in practice, discriminatory against non-Asian students and in favor of Asian students.

This is utter falsehood.

Asian American strength at TJ grew gradually from under 19% in 1983 at 3% per year, in small increments. There is no policy to be blamed, as the strength grew organically over the last 30 years without a helping had from the politicians, but by increasing asian american student interest and effort. But the FCPS used the battle axe, to chop their strength in just one admission cycle.

The axe went to "feeder" schools and private schools.

100% of FCPS middle schools were represented for 2025

+142 students from underrepresented MSs (6% to 31%)
-36 from private school (10% to 3%)
-42 from well/over represented middle schools (84% to 67%)

[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.

The Asian American community is an incredibly diverse group, and the revised admissions process benefits all students, including Asian American students who are low-income or English language learners, a fact that the Coalition for TJ ignores,” said Niyati Shah (AAAJ - Asian Americans Advancing Justice).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I didn't realize the largest beneficiaries of the changes were Asians, but I'm glad the new process is more inclusive so students who aren't at the most affluent schools can still participate.

You and a squirrel frolicking under a tree could concoct tales, and revel in falsehood. However, those who read the amicus brief will note that Asian American student representation was reduced from 73% to 54% in just one admissions cycle.

Because the previous policy was, in practice, discriminatory against non-Asian students and in favor of Asian students.

This is utter falsehood.

Asian American strength at TJ grew gradually from under 19% in 1983 at 3% per year, in small increments. There is no policy to be blamed, as the strength grew organically over the last 30 years without a helping had from the politicians, but by increasing asian american student interest and effort. But the FCPS used the battle axe, to chop their strength in just one admission cycle.

TJ was not a selective magnet in 1983. It was a traditional high school. It's also weird that you keep using the phrase "Asian American strength". Comes off weirdly authoritarian.

[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.

By this logic, no entity could ever seek to correct a pre-existing selection process that was discriminatory by replacing it with one that is not discriminatory.

Imagine an international corporation that had a de facto (unwritten) policy in place to hire 95% of its workers from the Western Hemisphere. Obviously, this corporation is discriminating against Asian applicants because the overwhelming majority of the global Asian population lives in the Eastern Hemisphere.

By your logic, that corporation eliminating that policy and committing to hire at least 30% of its workers from each Hemisphere would be an illegal act of racial balancing that placed an undue burden against, say, Hispanic people because the balance of them live in the Western Hemisphere. They might argue that they used to have the ability to compete for 95% of the spaces available but now they can only compete for 70%.

Your reasoning doesn't work, nor does PLF's.

This entire argument reeks of racism. Any effort that "seeks to correct" a racial composition to the liking of politicians is racist and unconstitutional. It is racist to attempt or even say the racial composition in NBA needs to be "corrected". It is discriminatory to devise and enforce a racially targeted policy to bring down the representation of dominating race within an organically evolved NBA composition of 73.2 percent black players, 16.8 percent white players, 3.1 percent Latino players of any race, and 0.4 percent Asian players. In a similar vein, it is undeniably racist for FCPS to concoct an essay based admissions policy with the target of bringing down an organically evolved Asian American student strength from 73% to 54%.