SFFA doesn't like the Asian American %

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t about acceptance, just enrollment. Maybe fewer Asians want to attend those schools.

Just 3 of the top 15 colleges and 2 Ivies.

Yeah.....right.

Based on all the statistical models and the self confessed amicus briefs by many of these colleges, we expected to see a 50% drop in URM and a significant increase in asian admissions.
Yale specifically signed onto a brief saying that the end of racial preferences would be devastating to their URM population and there was no possible way to maintain their diversity without race conscious admissions.
So were they lying then or are they lying now?

Duke decided to care about Carolina residents. Do you expect a district court in NC to tell them they can't do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is what people thought would happen…that it would benefit whites the most…yet how many Asians were on this forum celebrating the end of AA.

Asians complain about model minority and them totally believe in it when convenient.

Those darn Asians, believing in transparent policies with fair standards for all

If you think they’re fighting for anyone besides their personal child, I have got a lovely bridge you should buy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The universities don’t have the sole mission of admitting the 1000 smartest students every year. That’s not their goal. They cannot say they thought because a lot of your heads would explode.

This!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Now Ed Blum's group doesn't like the decrease in admitted Asian American students at Yale, Princeton, and Duke.

This is getting ridiculous.

Excerpt from a New York Times article from today:

"The group that successfully sued Harvard to end affirmative action in university admissions last year is now threatening to investigate whether schools are complying with the new rules and to file lawsuits if it believes that they are not.

The group, Students for Fair Admissions, has focused on three universities — Princeton, Yale and Duke — where there were notable declines in Asian American enrollment this year compared with the last year, which the group said defied expectations.

On Tuesday, Students for Fair Admissions sent letters to the schools questioning whether they were complying with the rules laid out by the Supreme Court. Princeton, Duke and Yale also saw minor differences in Black and Hispanic enrollment in the first class of students admitted since the court struck down race-conscious admissions.

The group, a nonprofit that opposes race-based admissions and that represented Asian students in the lawsuit against Harvard, suggested that it was setting itself up as an enforcer of the new rules."

It's not ridiculous at all. SFFA brought the action which was successful. Scotus said stop discriminating based upon race. Colleges and universities sent out letters asserting to alumni that, nevertheless, they remained committed to diversity (but only one kind) and started playing games in the essays. Not smart to thimb your nose at SCOTUS. The numbers of asian students went down! that wasn't supposed to happen. I hope they brong a second suit for clarification. The schools are defying the ruling and putting themselves in charge of race based admissions in America.

The percentage of Asian American accepted to these schools went up sharply when the law suit was filed. Not when SCOTUS released their decision. The schools were already ahead of it. So it's unsurprising that admissions numbers are generally flat for Asian Americans.

Doesn't that mean that these school might have known all along that they were discriminating against asians? It's possible that the effect of SFFA was already baked in by the tie the opinion was issued, but I'd like to see the Arcidiacono and Card reports on the class of 2028. Arcidiacono might get conflicted out because he is a professor at Duke.

What is interesting is how much divergence there is with how each particular college is handling admissions in the year since the decision. There is no uniformity. Most see value to the overall educational experience of their communities when there is a broad array of students with a wide variety of backgrounds. But there is no consensus on how to achieve that presently.

Most colleges and universities in the world has almost zero skin color diversity without being crippled in their educational mission. Most HBCUs lack diversity and that doesn't seem to prevent them from providing a good education.

And SFFA are just a bunch of political grifters out to make bank out of a hot button issue. I can assure you they do not care about the well-being of any student in America.

How is SFFA making "bank"
They have been single mindedly pursuing this one issue for decades with little to no payoff.
Edward Blum makes $50,000/year from SFFA.
He has an unpaid felllowship at the American Enterprise Institute so he gets access to their resources but no money.

When compared to outfits like BLM, the grifting seems hard to detect.

[Anonymous]

“It's not ridiculous at all. SFFA brought the action which was successful. Scotus said stop discriminating based upon race. Colleges and universities sent out letters asserting to alumni that, nevertheless, they remained committed to diversity (but only one kind) and started playing games in the essays. Not smart to thimb your nose at SCOTUS. The numbers of asian students went down! that wasn't supposed to happen. I hope they brong a second suit for clarification. The schools are defying the ruling and putting themselves in charge of race based admissions in America.”

Yes. It is quite ridiculous. SCOTUS is the most corrupt court ever and has no credibility and no ethics. They didn’t ban it for the military. Why is that? They didn’t address legacy admissions-otherwise known as white affirmative action. Why is that? Again, it’s all a lie. Nobody is entitled to go to these schools. Get over yourselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
“It's not ridiculous at all. SFFA brought the action which was successful. Scotus said stop discriminating based upon race. Colleges and universities sent out letters asserting to alumni that, nevertheless, they remained committed to diversity (but only one kind) and started playing games in the essays. Not smart to thimb your nose at SCOTUS. The numbers of asian students went down! that wasn't supposed to happen. I hope they brong a second suit for clarification. The schools are defying the ruling and putting themselves in charge of race based admissions in America.”

Yes. It is quite ridiculous. SCOTUS is the most corrupt court ever and has no credibility and no ethics. They didn’t ban it for the military. Why is that? They didn’t address legacy admissions-otherwise known as white affirmative action. Why is that? Again, it’s all a lie. Nobody is entitled to go to these schools. Get over yourselves.

They didn't ban it for the military because academies are unique and no one briefed the issue

They didn't address legacy because not having a parent who graduated from Harvard is not a protected class

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Now Ed Blum's group doesn't like the decrease in admitted Asian American students at Yale, Princeton, and Duke.

This is getting ridiculous.

Excerpt from a New York Times article from today:

"The group that successfully sued Harvard to end affirmative action in university admissions last year is now threatening to investigate whether schools are complying with the new rules and to file lawsuits if it believes that they are not.

The group, Students for Fair Admissions, has focused on three universities — Princeton, Yale and Duke — where there were notable declines in Asian American enrollment this year compared with the last year, which the group said defied expectations.

On Tuesday, Students for Fair Admissions sent letters to the schools questioning whether they were complying with the rules laid out by the Supreme Court. Princeton, Duke and Yale also saw minor differences in Black and Hispanic enrollment in the first class of students admitted since the court struck down race-conscious admissions.

The group, a nonprofit that opposes race-based admissions and that represented Asian students in the lawsuit against Harvard, suggested that it was setting itself up as an enforcer of the new rules."

It's not ridiculous at all. SFFA brought the action which was successful. Scotus said stop discriminating based upon race. Colleges and universities sent out letters asserting to alumni that, nevertheless, they remained committed to diversity (but only one kind) and started playing games in the essays. Not smart to thimb your nose at SCOTUS. The numbers of asian students went down! that wasn't supposed to happen. I hope they brong a second suit for clarification. The schools are defying the ruling and putting themselves in charge of race based admissions in America.

The percentage of Asian American accepted to these schools went up sharply when the law suit was filed. Not when SCOTUS released their decision. The schools were already ahead of it. So it's unsurprising that admissions numbers are generally flat for Asian Americans.

Doesn't that mean that these school might have known all along that they were discriminating against asians? It's possible that the effect of SFFA was already baked in by the tie the opinion was issued, but I'd like to see the Arcidiacono and Card reports on the class of 2028. Arcidiacono might get conflicted out because he is a professor at Duke.

What is interesting is how much divergence there is with how each particular college is handling admissions in the year since the decision. There is no uniformity. Most see value to the overall educational experience of their communities when there is a broad array of students with a wide variety of backgrounds. But there is no consensus on how to achieve that presently.

Most colleges and universities in the world has almost zero skin color diversity without being crippled in their educational mission. Most HBCUs lack diversity and that doesn't seem to prevent them from providing a good education.

And SFFA are just a bunch of political grifters out to make bank out of a hot button issue. I can assure you they do not care about the well-being of any student in America.

How is SFFA making "bank"
They have been single mindedly pursuing this one issue for decades with little to no payoff.
Edward Blum makes $50,000/year from SFFA.
He has an unpaid felllowship at the American Enterprise Institute so he gets access to their resources but no money.

When compared to outfits like BLM, the grifting seems hard to detect.

What makes you say this? I see a lot of problems in this world that perhaps could be alleviated if there were more skin color diversity in more colleges and universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What makes you say this? I see a lot of problems in this world that perhaps could be alleviated if there were more skin color diversity in more colleges and universities.

Uhhhhh... like what?

[Anonymous]

The slight drop in accepted Asians is less than the increase in accepted unknown race category. Probably most of that unchecked race category are Asian. I think this SFFA is getting ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean during the original lawsuit Yale said they couldn't have a diverse class without affirmative action, yet this year they clearly have just as diverse of a class. But of these three schools, I think Duke's in more aligned with the results of the lawsuit. By focusing on low-income North and South Carolina residents, they're able to keep their Black enrollment up without breaking the law.

I agree. If they gave a preference to poor North Carolinians, I suspect you can get the sort of result Duke got.
Yale, and Princeton (and frankly even Penn and Dartmouth) are harder to explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean during the original lawsuit Yale said they couldn't have a diverse class without affirmative action, yet this year they clearly have just as diverse of a class. But of these three schools, I think Duke's in more aligned with the results of the lawsuit. By focusing on low-income North and South Carolina residents, they're able to keep their Black enrollment up without breaking the law.

I agree. If they gave a preference to poor North Carolinians, I suspect you can get the sort of result Duke got.
Yale, and Princeton (and frankly even Penn and Dartmouth) are harder to explain.

Penn has always given preference to kids that live in Philadelphia, so they could have decided to up those numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course the schools need to be monitored.
They are not above the law or anything.

They like to think they ARE the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The universities don’t have the sole mission of admitting the 1000 smartest students every year. That’s not their goal. They cannot say they thought because a lot of your heads would explode.

But they shouldn't be racially discriminating.
Racial discrimination is an impermissible goal.
And that is what they think is still happening despite the supreme court telling them to knock it off.

And frankly rank order admission to college based on academic stats is pretty common in the rest of the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Now Ed Blum's group doesn't like the decrease in admitted Asian American students at Yale, Princeton, and Duke.

This is getting ridiculous.

Excerpt from a New York Times article from today:

"The group that successfully sued Harvard to end affirmative action in university admissions last year is now threatening to investigate whether schools are complying with the new rules and to file lawsuits if it believes that they are not.

The group, Students for Fair Admissions, has focused on three universities — Princeton, Yale and Duke — where there were notable declines in Asian American enrollment this year compared with the last year, which the group said defied expectations.

On Tuesday, Students for Fair Admissions sent letters to the schools questioning whether they were complying with the rules laid out by the Supreme Court. Princeton, Duke and Yale also saw minor differences in Black and Hispanic enrollment in the first class of students admitted since the court struck down race-conscious admissions.

The group, a nonprofit that opposes race-based admissions and that represented Asian students in the lawsuit against Harvard, suggested that it was setting itself up as an enforcer of the new rules."

Nice! Keep the college cartel on its toes. Ultimate goal should be 100% transparency with the admissions process.

Unless he has evidence, it'll end with the schools not bothering to respond to his letters

And costing them legal fees and negative publicity once he decides to take them to court with a 'friendly' judge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is what people thought would happen…that it would benefit whites the most…yet how many Asians were on this forum celebrating the end of AA.

Asians complain about model minority and them totally believe in it when convenient.

Those darn Asians, believing in transparent policies with fair standards for all

Well….what’s the conspiracy theory now?

Well, considering the last conspiracy theory turned out to be true, maybe this one has some merit as well.

I think the theory is that schools are still trying to achieve racial diversity by targetting proxies for race.
Something that was specifically prohibited by the supreme court ruling.

Which resulted in more white people? Nice job everyone!

Racists continue to do racist things. News at 11:00

Racial discrimination is a stubborn thing, the racists always think they are being virtuous.