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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Seriously - how do you even ask a question like that??

When you ask that question, you are assuming that you know what people from other races do and do not deserve. And you don't. You may have an idea of what you and your community deserve, but I'll be damned if you tell me what me and mine deserve.

I can't believe how stupid you are. You were the one who made an assumption that everyone deserves the same regardless of their effort and aptitude, not me.

I'm not the person you replied to, so you can kick rocks on that one.

No one here is assuming that everyone deserves the same regardless of their effort and aptitude. What people like me ARE saying is that there isn't nearly as big a difference in relative effort and aptitude between different racial groups as people like YOU seem to think there are.

I'll say this, though. People who choose not to exist in diverse spaces have no reason to know anything about people from other cultures. So your ignorance is excusable, but your attitude is not.

Show us the evidence. Don't just talk out of your arse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Because there is no inherent difference between the races in how meritorious they are to attend a specialized selective high school. Thinking that there is is the literal definition of racism.

That's a lie yourself probably doesn't even believe. Do you call NBA racist too because it's black concentrated?

The NBA is a professional basketball league with profit-motivated teams who are selecting players based on who can help them win games. There is no part of that profile that matches with TJ as a public magnet school.

Why do people insist on this comparison?

Because we're talking about merit. It has nothing to do with the nature of the business.

TJ is not a business. It is a publicly funded educational opportunity. Why do you believe that you get to decide what constitutes merit with respect to TJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Seriously - how do you even ask a question like that??

When you ask that question, you are assuming that you know what people from other races do and do not deserve. And you don't. You may have an idea of what you and your community deserve, but I'll be damned if you tell me what me and mine deserve.

I can't believe how stupid you are. You were the one who made an assumption that everyone deserves the same regardless of their effort and aptitude, not me.

I'm not the person you replied to, so you can kick rocks on that one.

No one here is assuming that everyone deserves the same regardless of their effort and aptitude. What people like me ARE saying is that there isn't nearly as big a difference in relative effort and aptitude between different racial groups as people like YOU seem to think there are.

I'll say this, though. People who choose not to exist in diverse spaces have no reason to know anything about people from other cultures. So your ignorance is excusable, but your attitude is not.

Show us the evidence. Don't just talk out of your arse.

All of the top schools that have committed to diversity initiatives still produce extremely desirable graduates and an incredibly strong network of young contributors to society. They haven't gone down the tubes just because they decided to open their doors to a few highly capable and deserving students from races that you seem to think only care about sports, shoes, and video games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Why wouldn't they have the same admissions rate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

+1000. It is indeed far easier and more straightforward to make the argument that the previous admissions process had an adverse impact on Black and Hispanic students than it is that the current admissions process has an adverse impact on Asian students. You have to come from a racist starting point of "Asians should have a supermajority of seats at TJ because they work harder and deserve it more" in order to believe that the new process adversely impacts them. And some of you folks have told on yourselves pretty hard by not only openly stating those racist opinions, but also not having the self-awareness to realize that they are among the ugliest forms of discriminatory rhetoric.

FCPS could have very easily - with proper strategic messaging - instituted a more equitable merit-based admissions process without an exam that would have had a similar impact without the messy question of intent. They were clumsy about it and are now paying the price. Time will tell how the new superintendent will approach the question.

Yes, this was clearly demonstrated by recent comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Because there is no inherent difference between the races in how meritorious they are to attend a specialized selective high school. Thinking that there is is the literal definition of racism.

That's a lie yourself probably doesn't even believe. Do you call NBA racist too because it's black concentrated?

The NBA is a professional basketball league with profit-motivated teams who are selecting players based on who can help them win games. There is no part of that profile that matches with TJ as a public magnet school.

Why do people insist on this comparison?

Because we're talking about merit. It has nothing to do with the nature of the business.

TJ is not a business. It is a publicly funded educational opportunity. Why do you believe that you get to decide what constitutes merit with respect to TJ?

Exactly. You don't get to decide either. As a matter of fact, you have been ruled as a racist in a federal court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

+1000. It is indeed far easier and more straightforward to make the argument that the previous admissions process had an adverse impact on Black and Hispanic students than it is that the current admissions process has an adverse impact on Asian students. You have to come from a racist starting point of "Asians should have a supermajority of seats at TJ because they work harder and deserve it more" in order to believe that the new process adversely impacts them. And some of you folks have told on yourselves pretty hard by not only openly stating those racist opinions, but also not having the self-awareness to realize that they are among the ugliest forms of discriminatory rhetoric.

FCPS could have very easily - with proper strategic messaging - instituted a more equitable merit-based admissions process without an exam that would have had a similar impact without the messy question of intent. They were clumsy about it and are now paying the price. Time will tell how the new superintendent will approach the question.

Yes, this was clearly demonstrated by recent comments.

Wasn't the test open to everyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

+1000. It is indeed far easier and more straightforward to make the argument that the previous admissions process had an adverse impact on Black and Hispanic students than it is that the current admissions process has an adverse impact on Asian students. You have to come from a racist starting point of "Asians should have a supermajority of seats at TJ because they work harder and deserve it more" in order to believe that the new process adversely impacts them. And some of you folks have told on yourselves pretty hard by not only openly stating those racist opinions, but also not having the self-awareness to realize that they are among the ugliest forms of discriminatory rhetoric.

FCPS could have very easily - with proper strategic messaging - instituted a more equitable merit-based admissions process without an exam that would have had a similar impact without the messy question of intent. They were clumsy about it and are now paying the price. Time will tell how the new superintendent will approach the question.

Yes, this was clearly demonstrated by recent comments.

Wasn't the test open to everyone?[u]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Because there is no inherent difference between the races in how meritorious they are to attend a specialized selective high school. Thinking that there is is the literal definition of racism.

That's a lie yourself probably doesn't even believe. Do you call NBA racist too because it's black concentrated?

The NBA is a professional basketball league with profit-motivated teams who are selecting players based on who can help them win games. There is no part of that profile that matches with TJ as a public magnet school.

Why do people insist on this comparison?

Because we're talking about merit. It has nothing to do with the nature of the business.

TJ is not a business. It is a publicly funded educational opportunity. Why do you believe that you get to decide what constitutes merit with respect to TJ?

Exactly. You don't get to decide either. As a matter of fact, you have been ruled as a racist in a federal court.

I have? When was I ruled as a racist? I have spent no time in a federal court and my name has never been attached to any lawsuit in a federal court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

+1000. It is indeed far easier and more straightforward to make the argument that the previous admissions process had an adverse impact on Black and Hispanic students than it is that the current admissions process has an adverse impact on Asian students. You have to come from a racist starting point of "Asians should have a supermajority of seats at TJ because they work harder and deserve it more" in order to believe that the new process adversely impacts them. And some of you folks have told on yourselves pretty hard by not only openly stating those racist opinions, but also not having the self-awareness to realize that they are among the ugliest forms of discriminatory rhetoric.

FCPS could have very easily - with proper strategic messaging - instituted a more equitable merit-based admissions process without an exam that would have had a similar impact without the messy question of intent. They were clumsy about it and are now paying the price. Time will tell how the new superintendent will approach the question.

Yes, this was clearly demonstrated by recent comments.

Wasn't the test open to everyone?

"Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Because there is no inherent difference between the races in how meritorious they are to attend a specialized selective high school. Thinking that there is is the literal definition of racism.

That's a lie yourself probably doesn't even believe. Do you call NBA racist too because it's black concentrated?

The NBA is a professional basketball league with profit-motivated teams who are selecting players based on who can help them win games. There is no part of that profile that matches with TJ as a public magnet school.

Why do people insist on this comparison?

Because we're talking about merit. It has nothing to do with the nature of the business.

TJ is not a business. It is a publicly funded educational opportunity. Why do you believe that you get to decide what constitutes merit with respect to TJ?

Exactly. You don't get to decide either. As a matter of fact, you have been ruled as a racist in a federal court.

I have? When was I ruled as a racist? I have spent no time in a federal court and my name has never been attached to any lawsuit in a federal court.

You as in you and your white liberal criminal partners in FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Is there a troll pretending to be a hysterical Asian parent?

Some of these comments are over-the-top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Admissions process is race blind.

Please read the opinion. Poll taxes are race blind too. Facially racial neutral policies are discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny review when adopted with a partial (or mainly) discriminatory intent. The admissions policy was determined to have been adopted with the purpose of "racial balancing" and set up in a manner to ensure fewer Asian admits. If you read the opinion it is fully explained in there.

They are "discriminatory" because they have an adverse impact.

With the current admissions process, Asian applicants have a significant advantage.

They have a higher-than-average admissions rate (19% > 18%). And they are represented in higher relative numbers than the general FCPS population.

The admissions process itself - not the decision around it - isn't discriminatory.

WTF is this kind of logic? Why would everyone have the same admissions rate if it's merit based?

Because there is no inherent difference between the races in how meritorious they are to attend a specialized selective high school. Thinking that there is is the literal definition of racism.

That's a lie yourself probably doesn't even believe. Do you call NBA racist too because it's black concentrated?

The NBA is a professional basketball league with profit-motivated teams who are selecting players based on who can help them win games. There is no part of that profile that matches with TJ as a public magnet school.

Why do people insist on this comparison?

Because we're talking about merit. It has nothing to do with the nature of the business.

TJ is not a business. It is a publicly funded educational opportunity. Why do you believe that you get to decide what constitutes merit with respect to TJ?

Exactly. You don't get to decide either. As a matter of fact, you have been ruled as a racist in a federal court.

I have? When was I ruled as a racist? I have spent no time in a federal court and my name has never been attached to any lawsuit in a federal court.

You as in you and your white liberal criminal partners in FCPS.

I don’t have any of those. In fact, I am a person who believes that FCPS screwed up big time in approaching this issue the way that they did.

But you go ahead and do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a troll pretending to be a hysterical Asian parent?

Some of these comments are over-the-top.

We are all trolls here

[Anonymous]

Asians were wildly over represented before. While it is not reasonable to expect that merit outcomes will be identical to population levels when the population varies considerably in SES and English competency, it also is not reasonable to think peke are not going to bat an eyelash when the process yields more than TRIPLE the level of Asians compared to their level in the student population. Not 50% more or even 100% more - more than triple!

20% vs 70%+