Propose parents sue the Coalition for TJ--you're holding up our kids' decisions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is getting ridiculous. How does this outfit argue that they care about students when they are screwing with the class of 2026 decisions?

Shut up and get out of the way.

Your desire for clarity doesn't override the Constitution, and FCPS is ignoring the district court decision now anyway.

You might have considered whether, with over 200 schools, FCPS is really up to the task of trying to administer the equivalent of the admissions process at a selective SLAC at a single high school.

The new class would be seated if coalition for TJ didn't appeal the circuit courts ruling

The new class would be seated if FCPS followed the court order and used the original admission process or a plan b that the court asked them to do in last September.

You should sue FCPS too for holding up the decisions.

The court order said absolutely nothing about following the original admissions process (which, as others pointed out, would be impossible) nor did it indicate which aspects of the new process were enjoined from further use.

Essentially all Judge Hilton said (read the order) is "The motivation behind changing admissions processes was impermissibly racist and you can't use the new process to select the next class." He said nothing else.

The judge doesn't make laws or policies. It's not his role to spec out the needed changes.

The original policy is constitutional. It had been used for years. It's certainly possible to use it again. Or just get rid of the new changes.

It is NOT possible to use the old process. The exams that they were using no longer exist. And for anyone who wants to scream out "just pick a new exam!" like a dope, you don't understand how admissions works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is getting ridiculous. How does this outfit argue that they care about students when they are screwing with the class of 2026 decisions?

Shut up and get out of the way.

Your desire for clarity doesn't override the Constitution, and FCPS is ignoring the district court decision now anyway.

You might have considered whether, with over 200 schools, FCPS is really up to the task of trying to administer the equivalent of the admissions process at a selective SLAC at a single high school.

The new class would be seated if coalition for TJ didn't appeal the circuit courts ruling

The new class would be seated if FCPS followed the court order and used the original admission process or a plan b that the court asked them to do in last September.

You should sue FCPS too for holding up the decisions.

The court order said absolutely nothing about following the original admissions process (which, as others pointed out, would be impossible) nor did it indicate which aspects of the new process were enjoined from further use.

Essentially all Judge Hilton said (read the order) is "The motivation behind changing admissions processes was impermissibly racist and you can't use the new process to select the next class." He said nothing else.

The judge doesn't make laws or policies. It's not his role to spec out the needed changes.

The original policy is constitutional. It had been used for years. It's certainly possible to use it again. Or just get rid of the new changes.

It is NOT possible to use the old process. The exams that they were using no longer exist. And for anyone who wants to scream out "just pick a new exam!" like a dope, you don't understand how admissions works.

You sound like a dope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS did way worse for the class of 2025.

I saw the class of 2025 had the lowest attrition of any class in recent years. Is there a reason for this?

I believe it is the opposite - because the new students couldn't hack the program

No - the class of 2025 lost the fewest kids from admitted class by March of their freshman year.

#fakenews

Not very good with math, eh?

Class of 2025: 550 admitted - 529 (March enrollment) = 21 (3.8% attrition)
Class of 2024: 486 - 452 = 34 (7%)
Class of 2023: 504 - 468 = 36 (7%)
Class of 2022: 485 - 454 = 31 (6%)

Please provide a link to these numbers (besides your a**).

Also, I had a TJ kid. Most attrition is after freshman year and especially sophomore year. Freshman year is all about pitching softballs and acclimation. And now they. Have a lot of kids who are only in Geometry, not Math 4/5, where it gets hard. Get back to us in a year.

And yes, source for your numbers please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

My kid is applying and we'd join a class suit. If someone wants to kick one off.

This is one of the most idiotic things I’ve read in a long time. Suing C4TJ because they are defending constitutional rights? The incompetent racist school board who just can’t stop wasting millions of dollars in litigation is the one to blame. FCPS SB is the reason the class of 2025 received admissions decisions at the end of June as they engineered a new policy to get an outcome more to their liking. Regarding class of 2026 admissions, They should’ve prepared for an adverse ruling as they were warned and acknowledged, but unsurprisingly didn’t so they could cry inconvenience as an excuse to continue their racist admissions policy.

While it may change tomorrow, as of right now, the new admissions policy is legal, likely to be found constitutional, and is proceeding.

It has not been determined to be legal. It was found to be unconstitutional. For the moment the SB got a stay on the order forbidding them to use the new admissions policy but the stay does not rule on the merits of the case

It is currently legal because of Judge Heytens' granting of the stay. It may or may not stay legal, but that's another question.

The PP used the phrase "likely to be found constitutional" for the exact reason that you mentioned. The stay does not rule on the merits but it does evaluate the merits for likelihood of success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is getting ridiculous. How does this outfit argue that they care about students when they are screwing with the class of 2026 decisions?

Shut up and get out of the way.

Your desire for clarity doesn't override the Constitution, and FCPS is ignoring the district court decision now anyway.

You might have considered whether, with over 200 schools, FCPS is really up to the task of trying to administer the equivalent of the admissions process at a selective SLAC at a single high school.

The new class would be seated if coalition for TJ didn't appeal the circuit courts ruling

The new class would be seated if FCPS followed the court order and used the original admission process or a plan b that the court asked them to do in last September.

You should sue FCPS too for holding up the decisions.

The court order said absolutely nothing about following the original admissions process (which, as others pointed out, would be impossible) nor did it indicate which aspects of the new process were enjoined from further use.

Essentially all Judge Hilton said (read the order) is "The motivation behind changing admissions processes was impermissibly racist and you can't use the new process to select the next class." He said nothing else.

The judge doesn't make laws or policies. It's not his role to spec out the needed changes.

The original policy is constitutional. It had been used for years. It's certainly possible to use it again. Or just get rid of the new changes.

It is NOT possible to use the old process. The exams that they were using no longer exist. And for anyone who wants to scream out "just pick a new exam!" like a dope, you don't understand how admissions works.

You sound like a dope.

Fine, but I'm a dope who is right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

Is anyone suing TJAAG for starting all this mess in the first place?

They didn't start anything. They didn't design or implement the admissions process and they haven't filed nuisance suits seeking to enjoin the implementation.

It’s not a nuisance suit if you will and SCOTUS takes it seriously enough to order briefing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS did way worse for the class of 2025.

I saw the class of 2025 had the lowest attrition of any class in recent years. Is there a reason for this?

I believe it is the opposite - because the new students couldn't hack the program

No - the class of 2025 lost the fewest kids from admitted class by March of their freshman year.

#fakenews

Not very good with math, eh?

Class of 2025: 550 admitted - 529 (March enrollment) = 21 (3.8% attrition)
Class of 2024: 486 - 452 = 34 (7%)
Class of 2023: 504 - 468 = 36 (7%)
Class of 2022: 485 - 454 = 31 (6%)

Please provide a link to these numbers (besides your a**).

Also, I had a TJ kid. Most attrition is after freshman year and especially sophomore year. Freshman year is all about pitching softballs and acclimation. And now they. Have a lot of kids who are only in Geometry, not Math 4/5, where it gets hard. Get back to us in a year.

And yes, source for your numbers please.

DP. The sources for these numbers are the press releases of the numbers of students admitted (easily googleable if you look up "tjhsst admissions class of 202X") and the publicly available year-over-year demographic information available on the FCPS website under School Profiles.

We've already done the work and we're not about to do it again because you're lazy and committed to bad-faith arguments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

My kid is applying and we'd join a class suit. If someone wants to kick one off.

This is one of the most idiotic things I’ve read in a long time. Suing C4TJ because they are defending constitutional rights? The incompetent racist school board who just can’t stop wasting millions of dollars in litigation is the one to blame. FCPS SB is the reason the class of 2025 received admissions decisions at the end of June as they engineered a new policy to get an outcome more to their liking. Regarding class of 2026 admissions, They should’ve prepared for an adverse ruling as they were warned and acknowledged, but unsurprisingly didn’t so they could cry inconvenience as an excuse to continue their racist admissions policy.

While it may change tomorrow, as of right now, the new admissions policy is legal, likely to be found constitutional, and is proceeding.

It has not been determined to be legal. It was found to be unconstitutional. For the moment the SB got a stay on the order forbidding them to use the new admissions policy but the stay does not rule on the merits of the case

It is currently legal because of Judge Heytens' granting of the stay. It may or may not stay legal, but that's another question.

The PP used the phrase "likely to be found constitutional" for the exact reason that you mentioned. The stay does not rule on the merits but it does evaluate the merits for likelihood of success.

Actually, the new admissions system was found to be "illegal/unconstitutional" by the US District Court. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the District Court's Order. The appellate review of the District Court's decision is currently in process by the 4th Circuit and the decision on the merits won't be announced for about a year.

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether to vacate the Stay that was granted by the 4th Circuit. Let's not spread misinformation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

My kid is applying and we'd join a class suit. If someone wants to kick one off.

This is one of the most idiotic things I’ve read in a long time. Suing C4TJ because they are defending constitutional rights? The incompetent racist school board who just can’t stop wasting millions of dollars in litigation is the one to blame. FCPS SB is the reason the class of 2025 received admissions decisions at the end of June as they engineered a new policy to get an outcome more to their liking. Regarding class of 2026 admissions, They should’ve prepared for an adverse ruling as they were warned and acknowledged, but unsurprisingly didn’t so they could cry inconvenience as an excuse to continue their racist admissions policy.

While it may change tomorrow, as of right now, the new admissions policy is legal, likely to be found constitutional, and is proceeding.

It has not been determined to be legal. It was found to be unconstitutional. For the moment the SB got a stay on the order forbidding them to use the new admissions policy but the stay does not rule on the merits of the case

It is currently legal because of Judge Heytens' granting of the stay. It may or may not stay legal, but that's another question.

The PP used the phrase "likely to be found constitutional" for the exact reason that you mentioned. The stay does not rule on the merits but it does evaluate the merits for likelihood of success.

Actually, the new admissions system was found to be "illegal/unconstitutional" by the US District Court. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the District Court's Order. The appellate review of the District Court's decision is currently in process by the 4th Circuit and the decision on the merits won't be announced for about a year.

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether to vacate the Stay that was granted by the 4th Circuit. Let's not spread misinformation.

By law, because of the stay issued by Judge Heytens, the TJ Admissions Office is permitted to continue with the admissions process for the Class of 2026.

That's the literal definition of "legal". It may not be legal tomorrow, but it is legal today. As long as the stay remains under review, it continues to be legal.

If the TJ Admissions Office gets their work done and releases their decisions on Friday, the toothpaste will be out of the tube.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

My kid is applying and we'd join a class suit. If someone wants to kick one off.

This is one of the most idiotic things I’ve read in a long time. Suing C4TJ because they are defending constitutional rights? The incompetent racist school board who just can’t stop wasting millions of dollars in litigation is the one to blame. FCPS SB is the reason the class of 2025 received admissions decisions at the end of June as they engineered a new policy to get an outcome more to their liking. Regarding class of 2026 admissions, They should’ve prepared for an adverse ruling as they were warned and acknowledged, but unsurprisingly didn’t so they could cry inconvenience as an excuse to continue their racist admissions policy.

While it may change tomorrow, as of right now, the new admissions policy is legal, likely to be found constitutional, and is proceeding.

It has not been determined to be legal. It was found to be unconstitutional. For the moment the SB got a stay on the order forbidding them to use the new admissions policy but the stay does not rule on the merits of the case

It is currently legal because of Judge Heytens' granting of the stay. It may or may not stay legal, but that's another question.

The PP used the phrase "likely to be found constitutional" for the exact reason that you mentioned. The stay does not rule on the merits but it does evaluate the merits for likelihood of success.

Actually, the new admissions system was found to be "illegal/unconstitutional" by the US District Court. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the District Court's Order. The appellate review of the District Court's decision is currently in process by the 4th Circuit and the decision on the merits won't be announced for about a year.

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether to vacate the Stay that was granted by the 4th Circuit. Let's not spread misinformation.

The stay was granted because the court found that the lawsuit was likely to succeed on the merits. Not definitely but likely. Until the Supreme Court says otherwise, the new admissions system is legal and constitutional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

My kid is applying and we'd join a class suit. If someone wants to kick one off.

This is one of the most idiotic things I’ve read in a long time. Suing C4TJ because they are defending constitutional rights? The incompetent racist school board who just can’t stop wasting millions of dollars in litigation is the one to blame. FCPS SB is the reason the class of 2025 received admissions decisions at the end of June as they engineered a new policy to get an outcome more to their liking. Regarding class of 2026 admissions, They should’ve prepared for an adverse ruling as they were warned and acknowledged, but unsurprisingly didn’t so they could cry inconvenience as an excuse to continue their racist admissions policy.

While it may change tomorrow, as of right now, the new admissions policy is legal, likely to be found constitutional, and is proceeding.

It has not been determined to be legal. It was found to be unconstitutional. For the moment the SB got a stay on the order forbidding them to use the new admissions policy but the stay does not rule on the merits of the case

It is currently legal because of Judge Heytens' granting of the stay. It may or may not stay legal, but that's another question.

The PP used the phrase "likely to be found constitutional" for the exact reason that you mentioned. The stay does not rule on the merits but it does evaluate the merits for likelihood of success.

Actually, the new admissions system was found to be "illegal/unconstitutional" by the US District Court. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the District Court's Order. The appellate review of the District Court's decision is currently in process by the 4th Circuit and the decision on the merits won't be announced for about a year.

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether to vacate the Stay that was granted by the 4th Circuit. Let's not spread misinformation.

By law, because of the stay issued by Judge Heytens, the TJ Admissions Office is permitted to continue with the admissions process for the Class of 2026.

That's the literal definition of "legal". It may not be legal tomorrow, but it is legal today. As long as the stay remains under review, it continues to be legal.

If the TJ Admissions Office gets their work done and releases their decisions on Friday, the toothpaste will be out of the tube.

No. The admissions system was found to be illegal and all parties are in "holding" positions until we hear from the Supreme Court and the decision by the 4th Circuit on the appeals case. Let's not spread misinformation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

My kid is applying and we'd join a class suit. If someone wants to kick one off.

This is one of the most idiotic things I’ve read in a long time. Suing C4TJ because they are defending constitutional rights? The incompetent racist school board who just can’t stop wasting millions of dollars in litigation is the one to blame. FCPS SB is the reason the class of 2025 received admissions decisions at the end of June as they engineered a new policy to get an outcome more to their liking. Regarding class of 2026 admissions, They should’ve prepared for an adverse ruling as they were warned and acknowledged, but unsurprisingly didn’t so they could cry inconvenience as an excuse to continue their racist admissions policy.

While it may change tomorrow, as of right now, the new admissions policy is legal, likely to be found constitutional, and is proceeding.

It has not been determined to be legal. It was found to be unconstitutional. For the moment the SB got a stay on the order forbidding them to use the new admissions policy but the stay does not rule on the merits of the case

It is currently legal because of Judge Heytens' granting of the stay. It may or may not stay legal, but that's another question.

The PP used the phrase "likely to be found constitutional" for the exact reason that you mentioned. The stay does not rule on the merits but it does evaluate the merits for likelihood of success.

Actually, the new admissions system was found to be "illegal/unconstitutional" by the US District Court. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the District Court's Order. The appellate review of the District Court's decision is currently in process by the 4th Circuit and the decision on the merits won't be announced for about a year.

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether to vacate the Stay that was granted by the 4th Circuit. Let's not spread misinformation.

By law, because of the stay issued by Judge Heytens, the TJ Admissions Office is permitted to continue with the admissions process for the Class of 2026.

That's the literal definition of "legal". It may not be legal tomorrow, but it is legal today. As long as the stay remains under review, it continues to be legal.

If the TJ Admissions Office gets their work done and releases their decisions on Friday, the toothpaste will be out of the tube.

No. The admissions system was found to be illegal and all parties are in "holding" positions until we hear from the Supreme Court and the decision by the 4th Circuit on the appeals case. Let's not spread misinformation.

Racists who discriminate against Asians are good at spreading misinformation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So... is anyone suing C4TJ?

My kid is applying and we'd join a class suit. If someone wants to kick one off.

This is one of the most idiotic things I’ve read in a long time. Suing C4TJ because they are defending constitutional rights? The incompetent racist school board who just can’t stop wasting millions of dollars in litigation is the one to blame. FCPS SB is the reason the class of 2025 received admissions decisions at the end of June as they engineered a new policy to get an outcome more to their liking. Regarding class of 2026 admissions, They should’ve prepared for an adverse ruling as they were warned and acknowledged, but unsurprisingly didn’t so they could cry inconvenience as an excuse to continue their racist admissions policy.

While it may change tomorrow, as of right now, the new admissions policy is legal, likely to be found constitutional, and is proceeding.

It has not been determined to be legal. It was found to be unconstitutional. For the moment the SB got a stay on the order forbidding them to use the new admissions policy but the stay does not rule on the merits of the case

It is currently legal because of Judge Heytens' granting of the stay. It may or may not stay legal, but that's another question.

The PP used the phrase "likely to be found constitutional" for the exact reason that you mentioned. The stay does not rule on the merits but it does evaluate the merits for likelihood of success.

Actually, the new admissions system was found to be "illegal/unconstitutional" by the US District Court. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the District Court's Order. The appellate review of the District Court's decision is currently in process by the 4th Circuit and the decision on the merits won't be announced for about a year.

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether to vacate the Stay that was granted by the 4th Circuit. Let's not spread misinformation.

By law, because of the stay issued by Judge Heytens, the TJ Admissions Office is permitted to continue with the admissions process for the Class of 2026.

That's the literal definition of "legal". It may not be legal tomorrow, but it is legal today. As long as the stay remains under review, it continues to be legal.

If the TJ Admissions Office gets their work done and releases their decisions on Friday, the toothpaste will be out of the tube.

No. The admissions system was found to be illegal and all parties are in "holding" positions until we hear from the Supreme Court and the decision by the 4th Circuit on the appeals case. Let's not spread misinformation.

You can repeat your nonsense as often as you need to but you won't convince anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is getting ridiculous. How does this outfit argue that they care about students when they are screwing with the class of 2026 decisions?

Shut up and get out of the way.

Your desire for clarity doesn't override the Constitution, and FCPS is ignoring the district court decision now anyway.

You might have considered whether, with over 200 schools, FCPS is really up to the task of trying to administer the equivalent of the admissions process at a selective SLAC at a single high school.

The new class would be seated if coalition for TJ didn't appeal the circuit courts ruling

The new class would be seated if FCPS followed the court order and used the original admission process or a plan b that the court asked them to do in last September.

You should sue FCPS too for holding up the decisions.

The court order said absolutely nothing about following the original admissions process (which, as others pointed out, would be impossible) nor did it indicate which aspects of the new process were enjoined from further use.

Essentially all Judge Hilton said (read the order) is "The motivation behind changing admissions processes was impermissibly racist and you can't use the new process to select the next class." He said nothing else.

The judge doesn't make laws or policies. It's not his role to spec out the needed changes.

The original policy is constitutional. It had been used for years. It's certainly possible to use it again. Or just get rid of the new changes.

It is NOT possible to use the old process. The exams that they were using no longer exist. And for anyone who wants to scream out "just pick a new exam!" like a dope, you don't understand how admissions works.

That's why they'll go full on lottery if the GOP shills give into their base instincts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is getting ridiculous. How does this outfit argue that they care about students when they are screwing with the class of 2026 decisions?

Shut up and get out of the way.

Umm. . . you do realize they won the case, right? The school appealed and also appealed the Judge denying the stay pending appeal. So, maybe you should be angry with FCPS for not respecting the decision and denial of the stay.

No, I'm more upset with Asra whats-her-face trying to represent my interests when she really isn't. Her group wants to screw over my kid's application class for her gain.

Stop being a racist to a minority woman.

Funny how Asra is quick to pull out the racist card anytime anyone calls out her bullsh1t.

You are spreading disinformation Putin puppet.

I tried reading her editorial in the Post. She seems unhinged.