Supreme Court Is Asked to Hear a New Admissions Case on Race

[Anonymous]

A federal appeals court blocks a grant program for Black female entrepreneurs.

A legal battle between a program that awards grants to female entrepreneurs of color and a conservative nonprofit organization is expected to raise broader legal questions on the use of diversity programs in corporate America.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta ruled on Saturday to temporarily block the Fearless Fund from running its Strivers Grant Contest, which awards $20,000 grants to small businesses that are led by at least one woman of color and other requirements.

The panel of judges decided 2-1 that the venture capital fund is "racially discriminatory."

In a statement to NPR on Monday, Blum said his organization is pleased by the court's most recent decision and hopeful for a favorable outcome.

"The members of the American Alliance for Equal Rights are gratified that the 11th Circuit has recognized the likelihood that the Fearless Strivers Grant Contest is illegal. We look forward to the final resolution of this lawsuit," Blum said.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203221945/affirmative-action-black-female-entrepreneurs

TJ case is next!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A federal appeals court blocks a grant program for Black female entrepreneurs.

A legal battle between a program that awards grants to female entrepreneurs of color and a conservative nonprofit organization is expected to raise broader legal questions on the use of diversity programs in corporate America.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta ruled on Saturday to temporarily block the Fearless Fund from running its Strivers Grant Contest, which awards $20,000 grants to small businesses that are led by at least one woman of color and other requirements.

The panel of judges decided 2-1 that the venture capital fund is "racially discriminatory."

In a statement to NPR on Monday, Blum said his organization is pleased by the court's most recent decision and hopeful for a favorable outcome.

"The members of the American Alliance for Equal Rights are gratified that the 11th Circuit has recognized the likelihood that the Fearless Strivers Grant Contest is illegal. We look forward to the final resolution of this lawsuit," Blum said.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203221945/affirmative-action-black-female-entrepreneurs

TJ case is next!

All of these examples you provided involve explicit qualifications based on race. The TJ case does not.

Supreme Court precedent actually favors measures similar to what FCPS did with respect to university admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A federal appeals court blocks a grant program for Black female entrepreneurs.

A legal battle between a program that awards grants to female entrepreneurs of color and a conservative nonprofit organization is expected to raise broader legal questions on the use of diversity programs in corporate America.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta ruled on Saturday to temporarily block the Fearless Fund from running its Strivers Grant Contest, which awards $20,000 grants to small businesses that are led by at least one woman of color and other requirements.

The panel of judges decided 2-1 that the venture capital fund is "racially discriminatory."

In a statement to NPR on Monday, Blum said his organization is pleased by the court's most recent decision and hopeful for a favorable outcome.

"The members of the American Alliance for Equal Rights are gratified that the 11th Circuit has recognized the likelihood that the Fearless Strivers Grant Contest is illegal. We look forward to the final resolution of this lawsuit," Blum said.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203221945/affirmative-action-black-female-entrepreneurs

TJ case is next!

All of these examples you provided involve explicit qualifications based on race. The TJ case does not.

Supreme Court precedent actually favors measures similar to what FCPS did with respect to university admissions.

When there is no 'racial' intent unlike the TJ case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A federal appeals court blocks a grant program for Black female entrepreneurs.

A legal battle between a program that awards grants to female entrepreneurs of color and a conservative nonprofit organization is expected to raise broader legal questions on the use of diversity programs in corporate America.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta ruled on Saturday to temporarily block the Fearless Fund from running its Strivers Grant Contest, which awards $20,000 grants to small businesses that are led by at least one woman of color and other requirements.

The panel of judges decided 2-1 that the venture capital fund is "racially discriminatory."

In a statement to NPR on Monday, Blum said his organization is pleased by the court's most recent decision and hopeful for a favorable outcome.

"The members of the American Alliance for Equal Rights are gratified that the 11th Circuit has recognized the likelihood that the Fearless Strivers Grant Contest is illegal. We look forward to the final resolution of this lawsuit," Blum said.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203221945/affirmative-action-black-female-entrepreneurs

TJ case is next!

All of these examples you provided involve explicit qualifications based on race. The TJ case does not.

Supreme Court precedent actually favors measures similar to what FCPS did with respect to university admissions.

When there is no 'racial' intent unlike the TJ case.

By all means, please feel free to cite your conclusive proof that the intent of the admissions changes was specifically to reduce the proportion of Asian students at TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

1) Asians largest cohort at TJ as a percentage of the population and largest beneficiary of the selection changes again were lower-income Asians
2) More students throughout the county now participate in this program not mainly ones from the affluent schools
3) The current alterative is race-blind so discrimination isn't an issue

Truth!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NAACP was threatening another.lawsuit against TJ and the school board so they thought.the.changes would avoid it, but instead they got another one from the other side. They honestly thought Asians in NOVA would just take it.

That isn't actually the case. TJ admissions were quite low down the list of the Fairfax NAACP's priorities in the year or so before the admissions changes.

It was more than Scott Brabrand thought that changing TJ admissions would get him back into the good graces of the FCPS School Board, which had been criticizing him for the problems FCPS had with distance learning during Covid. Brabrand was a failure when it came to making sure there were good people in charge of IT, HR, or Facilities.

So he treated the George Floyd death as an opportunity to show the far-left SB members he could take up the "equity" bandwagon as well as the rest of them. The School Board went along for the ride, changed TJ admissions, and then got rid of Brabrand anyway.

It was all about politics, not about academic excellence.

You aren't fooling anyone. Everyone knows they changed admission because so many were buying the test answers from the prep centers.

Brabrand expressly said the reason for his proposed changes was George Floyd. Curie may live rent-free in your head in perpetuity, but it was never front and center for Brabrand.

The declining application numbers, exclusivity of so-called feeder middle schools, and culture at TJ of toxicity and competition rather than collegiality were additional reasons for the admissions change. There were many reasons. Which reason was the main driver? All of them.

Not to forget the test buying scandal

as in buying workbooks on amazon, at a far less price than a pair of Air Jordans

You’re disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NAACP was threatening another.lawsuit against TJ and the school board so they thought.the.changes would avoid it, but instead they got another one from the other side. They honestly thought Asians in NOVA would just take it.

That isn't actually the case. TJ admissions were quite low down the list of the Fairfax NAACP's priorities in the year or so before the admissions changes.

It was more than Scott Brabrand thought that changing TJ admissions would get him back into the good graces of the FCPS School Board, which had been criticizing him for the problems FCPS had with distance learning during Covid. Brabrand was a failure when it came to making sure there were good people in charge of IT, HR, or Facilities.

So he treated the George Floyd death as an opportunity to show the far-left SB members he could take up the "equity" bandwagon as well as the rest of them. The School Board went along for the ride, changed TJ admissions, and then got rid of Brabrand anyway.

It was all about politics, not about academic excellence.

Part of the reason that they proceeded to get rid of Brabrand anyway was the extent to which he bungled the early stages of the TJ Admissions upgrades.

The Merit Lottery proposal was a complete farce and his messaging on it was horrendous - and let's be serious, it would have been an unmitigated disaster. So the Board appropriately benched him and moved on to work directly with TJ Admissions to develop a far superior (although not perfect) new proposal that has been serving TJ well for the past three classes. Catastrophe was predicted by those on the right and nothing of the sort has come to pass.

The right is really committed to the narrative that society is in free fall and only they can stop the inevitable. They've been pushing that for decades. It was never true then and still isn't true today.

It sure is. Maybe not free fall but definitely declining.

Too many MAGAs spawning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take away from FCPS Board's actions to an Asian American student applicant: "We don't want to know how hard you studied Math, English, and Science in middle school. Hence, you will not be given a STEM evaluation test. However, your evaluation will be based on your skin color, and there are already too many of your kind at TJ."

+1

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-asked-to-weigh-in-on-prestigious-virginia-schools-allegedly-race-conscious-admissions-policies/

In 2020, the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., overhauled its admission standards following the murder of George Floyd. Among the policies enacted at the time were the removal of standardized entry tests and the allocation of admissions evenly across the system’s feeder schools, rather than taking the top applicants across the entire district. Consequently, Asian-American student enrollment nosedived from 73 percent to 54 percent the first year the changes went into effect while Hispanic and black representation grew exponentially.

This constitutes racial oppression of asian american students bring their number.
Unfortunately, some idiots here attempt to rationalize by citing asian american are still more than half so the racial suppression from 73% to 54% is justified, which is as racist as it would be to forcibly exclude a few African Americans from the NBA and justifying it by claiming they are still the majority.

Going after strength of any particular race is racist, and constitutes racial oppression, whether it is blacks in NBA or asian americans at TJ. No more racial attacks by evil forces in authoritative positions.

Discrimination based on race is unacceptable. It is unconstitutional to prevent a young African American from playing basketball at the county gym simply because there are already other kids with the same skin color inside. Denying admission based on a child''s skin color is a racist act. Similarly, it is both unconstitutional and discriminatory to deny entry to an Asian American student into a public STEM school just because there are already many students enrolled with the same skin color as theirs.

Sure, glad we avoid these issues by using a race-blind process for selection to these elite programs.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take away from FCPS Board's actions to an Asian American student applicant: "We don't want to know how hard you studied Math, English, and Science in middle school. Hence, you will not be given a STEM evaluation test. However, your evaluation will be based on your skin color, and there are already too many of your kind at TJ."

+1

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-asked-to-weigh-in-on-prestigious-virginia-schools-allegedly-race-conscious-admissions-policies/

In 2020, the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., overhauled its admission standards following the murder of George Floyd. Among the policies enacted at the time were the removal of standardized entry tests and the allocation of admissions evenly across the system’s feeder schools, rather than taking the top applicants across the entire district. Consequently, Asian-American student enrollment nosedived from 73 percent to 54 percent the first year the changes went into effect while Hispanic and black representation grew exponentially.

Incredibly, a race-blind process is overwhelming in selecting Asian students for TJ. As a group, they seem to be doing better than any other group in terms of TJ selection. Just don't see the problem here.

It's similar to saying that when UVA went co-ed, the number of male students declined, which indicates gender bias. The process was so overwhelming skewed towards Asians that any change however fair would result in a decrease.

I'm glad that students throughout the county now have a shot at these opportunities, not just those from wealthy schools. I even read the group whose enrollment increased the most because of these changes were low-income Asians.

But they aren’t the right kind of Asian students so Republicans are mad. They only like rich Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take away from FCPS Board's actions to an Asian American student applicant: "We don't want to know how hard you studied Math, English, and Science in middle school. Hence, you will not be given a STEM evaluation test. However, your evaluation will be based on your skin color, and there are already too many of your kind at TJ."

+1

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-asked-to-weigh-in-on-prestigious-virginia-schools-allegedly-race-conscious-admissions-policies/

In 2020, the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., overhauled its admission standards following the murder of George Floyd. Among the policies enacted at the time were the removal of standardized entry tests and the allocation of admissions evenly across the system’s feeder schools, rather than taking the top applicants across the entire district. Consequently, Asian-American student enrollment nosedived from 73 percent to 54 percent the first year the changes went into effect while Hispanic and black representation grew exponentially.

This constitutes racial oppression of asian american students bring their number.
Unfortunately, some idiots here attempt to rationalize by citing asian american are still more than half so the racial suppression from 73% to 54% is justified, which is as racist as it would be to forcibly exclude a few African Americans from the NBA and justifying it by claiming they are still the majority.

Going after strength of any particular race is racist, and constitutes racial oppression, whether it is blacks in NBA or asian americans at TJ. No more racial attacks by evil forces in authoritative positions.

If a decrease in enrollment constitutes oppression, returning to 74% would constitute racial oppression (whatever that means) of other groups.

+1

Can’t ever change admissions now. You’ll be “oppressing” someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take away from FCPS Board's actions to an Asian American student applicant: "We don't want to know how hard you studied Math, English, and Science in middle school. Hence, you will not be given a STEM evaluation test. However, your evaluation will be based on your skin color, and there are already too many of your kind at TJ."

+1

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-asked-to-weigh-in-on-prestigious-virginia-schools-allegedly-race-conscious-admissions-policies/

In 2020, the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., overhauled its admission standards following the murder of George Floyd. Among the policies enacted at the time were the removal of standardized entry tests and the allocation of admissions evenly across the system’s feeder schools, rather than taking the top applicants across the entire district. Consequently, Asian-American student enrollment nosedived from 73 percent to 54 percent the first year the changes went into effect while Hispanic and black representation grew exponentially.

This constitutes racial oppression of asian american students bring their number.
Unfortunately, some idiots here attempt to rationalize by citing asian american are still more than half so the racial suppression from 73% to 54% is justified, which is as racist as it would be to forcibly exclude a few African Americans from the NBA and justifying it by claiming they are still the majority.

Going after strength of any particular race is racist, and constitutes racial oppression, whether it is blacks in NBA or asian americans at TJ. No more racial attacks by evil forces in authoritative positions.

Discrimination based on race is unacceptable. It is unconstitutional to prevent a young African American from playing basketball at the county gym simply because there are already other kids with the same skin color inside. Denying admission based on a child''s skin color is a racist act. Similarly, it is both unconstitutional and discriminatory to deny entry to an Asian American student into a public STEM school just because there are already many students enrolled with the same skin color as theirs.

Concise and to the point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The Fairfax County School Board members exchanged messages saying that Asian numbers should go down... The US District Court found as a matter of factual finding that the school system had racially discriminatory intent (messages) and that 'disparate impact' (Asian students going from about 73% to 54%) was established and ruled the new admission system unconstitutional as being discriminatory against Asians.

Ironically, target was achieved, unconstitutionally!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Fairfax County School Board members exchanged messages saying that Asian numbers should go down... The US District Court found as a matter of factual finding that the school system had racially discriminatory intent (messages) and that 'disparate impact' (Asian students going from about 73% to 54%) was established and ruled the new admission system unconstitutional as being discriminatory against Asians.

Ironically, target was achieved, unconstitutionally!

I mean, is that your best take? Because there's a reason that thread was locked. It was overturned. Found to be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take away from FCPS Board's actions to an Asian American student applicant: "We don't want to know how hard you studied Math, English, and Science in middle school. Hence, you will not be given a STEM evaluation test. However, your evaluation will be based on your skin color, and there are already too many of your kind at TJ."

+1

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-asked-to-weigh-in-on-prestigious-virginia-schools-allegedly-race-conscious-admissions-policies/

In 2020, the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., overhauled its admission standards following the murder of George Floyd. Among the policies enacted at the time were the removal of standardized entry tests and the allocation of admissions evenly across the system’s feeder schools, rather than taking the top applicants across the entire district. Consequently, Asian-American student enrollment nosedived from 73 percent to 54 percent the first year the changes went into effect while Hispanic and black representation grew exponentially.

This constitutes racial oppression of asian american students bring their number.
Unfortunately, some idiots here attempt to rationalize by citing asian american are still more than half so the racial suppression from 73% to 54% is justified, which is as racist as it would be to forcibly exclude a few African Americans from the NBA and justifying it by claiming they are still the majority.

Going after strength of any particular race is racist, and constitutes racial oppression, whether it is blacks in NBA or asian americans at TJ. No more racial attacks by evil forces in authoritative positions.

Discrimination based on race is unacceptable. It is unconstitutional to prevent a young African American from playing basketball at the county gym simply because there are already other kids with the same skin color inside. Denying admission based on a child''s skin color is a racist act. Similarly, it is both unconstitutional and discriminatory to deny entry to an Asian American student into a public STEM school just because there are already many students enrolled with the same skin color as theirs.

Concise and to the point

There is no racial discrimination in the TJ admissions process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A federal appeals court blocks a grant program for Black female entrepreneurs.

A legal battle between a program that awards grants to female entrepreneurs of color and a conservative nonprofit organization is expected to raise broader legal questions on the use of diversity programs in corporate America.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta ruled on Saturday to temporarily block the Fearless Fund from running its Strivers Grant Contest, which awards $20,000 grants to small businesses that are led by at least one woman of color and other requirements.

The panel of judges decided 2-1 that the venture capital fund is "racially discriminatory."

In a statement to NPR on Monday, Blum said his organization is pleased by the court's most recent decision and hopeful for a favorable outcome.

"The members of the American Alliance for Equal Rights are gratified that the 11th Circuit has recognized the likelihood that the Fearless Strivers Grant Contest is illegal. We look forward to the final resolution of this lawsuit," Blum said.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203221945/affirmative-action-black-female-entrepreneurs

TJ case is next!

All of these examples you provided involve explicit qualifications based on race. The TJ case does not.

Supreme Court precedent actually favors measures similar to what FCPS did with respect to university admissions.

When there is no 'racial' intent unlike the TJ case.

By all means, please feel free to cite your conclusive proof that the intent of the admissions changes was specifically to reduce the proportion of Asian students at TJ.

Crickets…