TJ CASE UPDATE: Cert Petition Distributed for Conference

[Anonymous]

It’s the perfect analogy. Personally I’m not very good at the game but why is there a merit based criteria.

I’m terrible at golf but I want to be in the pga. It’s not inclusive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this case hinges on perceived discrimination against Asians from a race-blind process that mostly admits Asians? I don't think even this wacky court would touch this nonsense.

Nonsense. This is a really dumb argument. You're saying the NBA because the draft mostly has Black athletes cannot discriminate against Black athletes because of that?

Please, stop trotting out this NBA analogy. It is not at all on point and it simply makes the person using it appear to have a racist view of the world. It does not at all illustrate what those using it seem to think it does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol. Asians in the community feel that’s it is and there is data that proves it. But who cares about them. Let’s be inclusive except if it impacts th

Anonymous wrote:So this case hinges on perceived discrimination against Asians from a race-blind process that mostly admits Asians? I don't think even this wacky court would touch this nonsense.

SOME (rich, privileged) Asians “feel” that it is.

But other Asians - and the facts - don’t support it.

[Anonymous]

To be inclusive and fair means having some criteria that is transparent.

If the org wants to use a lottery system then so be it. Make sure it’s a lottery that is transparent and not a closed door pick.

In a lottery you would give an advantage to the larger segment of the population - which might. It get to the “right” answer.

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the Petition for Certiorari in the Coalition for TJ vs. Fairfax County School Board case has been distributed for conference on 12/1/2023. What this means is that on that Friday, the justices will meet to discuss the merits of that case as well as (presumably) many others and will vote on whether to hear the case. Cert decisions are usually announced on Monday mornings, so it's fair to guess that we may hear about whether or not

Four of the nine justices must vote in favor of hearing the case in order for it to go on the Supreme Court docket. The only opportunity SCOTUS has had to weigh in on the case was when the Coalition applied for the Fourth Circuit's stay to be vacated shortly after the District Court ruled in favor of the Coalition. Essentially, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 in that situation to allow the updated TJ Admissions process to continue for the Class of 2026, surprising many observers. Kavanaugh, Barrett, and (importantly) Chief Justice Roberts joined the liberals to grant the Coalition its first major defeat in this process.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-170.html

Coalition-aligned observers will want to see more than four votes to grant cert, obviously. I think it's 50-50.

[Anonymous]

Asian community who sacrificed a t lot for their kids don’t need a system that disadvantages them. A friend told me that he just voted one way for the first time bc of bias against Asians.




quote=Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol. Asians in the community feel that’s it is and there is data that proves it. But who cares about them. Let’s be inclusive except if it impacts th

Anonymous wrote:So this case hinges on perceived discrimination against Asians from a race-blind process that mostly admits Asians? I don't think even this wacky court would touch this nonsense.

SOME (rich, privileged) Asians “feel” that it is.

But other Asians - and the facts - don’t support it.

[Anonymous]

Hope this gets to the right answer- transparency and fairness. Don’t discriminate against Asians.

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the Petition for Certiorari in the Coalition for TJ vs. Fairfax County School Board case has been distributed for conference on 12/1/2023. What this means is that on that Friday, the justices will meet to discuss the merits of that case as well as (presumably) many others and will vote on whether to hear the case. Cert decisions are usually announced on Monday mornings, so it's fair to guess that we may hear about whether or not

Four of the nine justices must vote in favor of hearing the case in order for it to go on the Supreme Court docket. The only opportunity SCOTUS has had to weigh in on the case was when the Coalition applied for the Fourth Circuit's stay to be vacated shortly after the District Court ruled in favor of the Coalition. Essentially, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 in that situation to allow the updated TJ Admissions process to continue for the Class of 2026, surprising many observers. Kavanaugh, Barrett, and (importantly) Chief Justice Roberts joined the liberals to grant the Coalition its first major defeat in this process.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-170.html

Coalition-aligned observers will want to see more than four votes to grant cert, obviously. I think it's 50-50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I meat might not get to the right answer.




To be inclusive and fair means having some criteria that is transparent.

If the org wants to use a lottery system then so be it. Make sure it’s a lottery that is transparent and not a closed door pick.

In a lottery you would give an advantage to the larger segment of the population - which might. It get to the “right” answer.

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the Petition for Certiorari in the Coalition for TJ vs. Fairfax County School Board case has been distributed for conference on 12/1/2023. What this means is that on that Friday, the justices will meet to discuss the merits of that case as well as (presumably) many others and will vote on whether to hear the case. Cert decisions are usually announced on Monday mornings, so it's fair to guess that we may hear about whether or not

Four of the nine justices must vote in favor of hearing the case in order for it to go on the Supreme Court docket. The only opportunity SCOTUS has had to weigh in on the case was when the Coalition applied for the Fourth Circuit's stay to be vacated shortly after the District Court ruled in favor of the Coalition. Essentially, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 in that situation to allow the updated TJ Admissions process to continue for the Class of 2026, surprising many observers. Kavanaugh, Barrett, and (importantly) Chief Justice Roberts joined the liberals to grant the Coalition its first major defeat in this process.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-170.html

Coalition-aligned observers will want to see more than four votes to grant cert, obviously. I think it's 50-50.

[Anonymous]

I was a low income. Worked hard to get where I am through merit. My parents had to work two jobs to make ends meet. As a student I could see where hard work pays off. I am discouraged to see how Asians are impacted here. My hope is that this can settle to a lprocess that doesn’t have bias against Asians.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this case hinges on perceived discrimination against Asians from a race-blind process that mostly admits Asians? I don't think even this wacky court would touch this nonsense

Nonsense. This is a really dumb argument. You're saying the NBA because the draft mostly has Black athletes cannot discriminate against Black athletes because of that?

How can you discriminate against a group without knowing their race? Also if you're mostly selecting that group it seems more like favoring.

A hypothetical and facetious example that addresses your question would be a qualifying question on the NBA draft questionnaire: "What is the definition of regatta?" Those who answer it correctly would be given preferential draft status. If the NBA adopts this qualifying question, then the percent of black athletes would decline a bit. The question is facially race-blind, but studies have shown that "what is a regatta" is a race-biased question.

Irrelevance of your argument aside, I would invite you to please submit the piece of this admissions process that discriminates against Asian students in the same way that a question like that would discriminate against Black athletes.

And please be reminded, before you answer, that the greatest beneficiaries of the new admissions process were low-income Asian students, who were admitted in greater numbers than Black students of all socioeconomic backgrounds combined.

[Anonymous]

Let's hope that Roberts votes to really end affirmative action that is achieved through 'indirect' means as well as 'direct means' since no entity will be engaged in AA directly anymore- it will all be done indirectly as was done in the TJ case.

There was a 'dicta' in the Harvard/NC case's majority opinion to support banning 'indirect' means of engaging in AA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's hope that Roberts votes to really end affirmative action that is achieved through 'indirect' means as well as 'direct means' since no entity will be engaged in AA directly anymore- it will all be done indirectly as was done in the TJ case.

There was a 'dicta' in the Harvard/NC case's majority opinion to support banning 'indirect' means of engaging in AA.

There was a lot more to the geographic selection than just race. You're being myopic by ignoring all the other reasons it was chosen.

I can't understand why you want the Supreme Court involved in the selection process of one magnet high school. It's bizarre. And shows your unfamiliarity with having the weight of the Supreme Court come down on your particular area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was a low income. Worked hard to get where I am through merit. My parents had to work two jobs to make ends meet. As a student I could see where hard work pays off. I am discouraged to see how Asians are impacted here. My hope is that this can settle to a lprocess that doesn’t have bias against Asians.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this case hinges on perceived discrimination against Asians from a race-blind process that mostly admits Asians? I don't think even this wacky court would touch this nonsense

Nonsense. This is a really dumb argument. You're saying the NBA because the draft mostly has Black athletes cannot discriminate against Black athletes because of that?

How can you discriminate against a group without knowing their race? Also if you're mostly selecting that group it seems more like favoring.

A hypothetical and facetious example that addresses your question would be a qualifying question on the NBA draft questionnaire: "What is the definition of regatta?" Those who answer it correctly would be given preferential draft status. If the NBA adopts this qualifying question, then the percent of black athletes would decline a bit. The question is facially race-blind, but studies have shown that "what is a regatta" is a race-biased question.

Irrelevance of your argument aside, I would invite you to please submit the piece of this admissions process that discriminates against Asian students in the same way that a question like that would discriminate against Black athletes.

And please be reminded, before you answer, that the greatest beneficiaries of the new admissions process were low-income Asian students, who were admitted in greater numbers than Black students of all socioeconomic backgrounds combined.

The current process does not have a bias against Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asian community who sacrificed a t lot for their kids don’t need a system that disadvantages them. A friend told me that he just voted one way for the first time bc of bias against Asians.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol. Asians in the community feel that’s it is and there is data that proves it. But who cares about them. Let’s be inclusive except if it impacts th

Anonymous wrote:So this case hinges on perceived discrimination against Asians from a race-blind process that mostly admits Asians? I don't think even this wacky court would touch this nonsense.

SOME (rich, privileged) Asians “feel” that it is.

But other Asians - and the facts - don’t support it.

Asian families are not “disadvantaged” by the current process.

[Anonymous]

OP, you started this thread to follow the cert petition, not for people to rehash the same old arguments. Do you have an update? Otherwise, I suggest this thread be locked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears that the Petition for Certiorari in the Coalition for TJ vs. Fairfax County School Board case has been distributed for conference on 12/1/2023. What this means is that on that Friday, the justices will meet to discuss the merits of that case as well as (presumably) many others and will vote on whether to hear the case. Cert decisions are usually announced on Monday mornings, so it's fair to guess that we may hear about whether or not

Four of the nine justices must vote in favor of hearing the case in order for it to go on the Supreme Court docket. The only opportunity SCOTUS has had to weigh in on the case was when the Coalition applied for the Fourth Circuit's stay to be vacated shortly after the District Court ruled in favor of the Coalition. Essentially, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 in that situation to allow the updated TJ Admissions process to continue for the Class of 2026, surprising many observers. Kavanaugh, Barrett, and (importantly) Chief Justice Roberts joined the liberals to grant the Coalition its first major defeat in this process.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-170.html

Coalition-aligned observers will want to see more than four votes to grant cert, obviously. I think it's 50-50.

With all the dirty tricks used to get them appointed and the long list of ethical violations, their legitimacy is in doubt.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, you started this thread to follow the cert petition, not for people to rehash the same old arguments. Do you have an update? Otherwise, I suggest this thread be locked.

DP. The disposition of the very petition will be clear relatively soon. Keep the thread open.

[Anonymous]

If you are Asian, you would feel disadvantaged. Many of us sacrificed a lot for our kids. We don’t need programs to put our children in a disadvantaged situation.





quote=Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asian community who sacrificed a t lot for their kids don’t need a system that disadvantages them. A friend told me that he just voted one way for the first time bc of bias against Asians.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol. Asians in the community feel that’s it is and there is data that proves it. But who cares about them. Let’s be inclusive except if it impacts th

Anonymous wrote:So this case hinges on perceived discrimination against Asians from a race-blind process that mostly admits Asians? I don't think even this wacky court would touch this nonsense.

SOME (rich, privileged) Asians “feel” that it is.

But other Asians - and the facts - don’t support it.

Asian families are not “disadvantaged” by the current process.