US Supreme Court Rules Against Affirmative Action in College Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have some questions:

1. Does this mean the race box goes away?

2. Does this mean the race box goes away immediately or next cycle?

3. Does this mean that colleges can't take an educated guess re: race and use that in consideration (ie, looking at name, zip, clubs, parents HSBCU legacy, etc)?

DP. Adding on..

4. If the checkbox does not go away, and a kid lies about their race, would that be grounds for dismissal if later discovered?

If a kid lies in the app, sure it could be grounds for dismissal if later discovered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is Harvard’s response- in case it hasn’t yet been posted (didn’t read the entire thread)

Dear Members of the Harvard Community,

Today, the Supreme Court delivered its decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The Court held that Harvard College’s admissions system does not comply with the principles of the equal protection clause embodied in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The Court also ruled that colleges and universities may consider in admissions decisions “an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” We will certainly comply with the Court’s decision.

We write today to reaffirm the fundamental principle that deep and transformative teaching, learning, and research depend upon a community comprising people of many backgrounds, perspectives, and lived experiences. That principle is as true and important today as it was yesterday. So too are the abiding values that have enabled us—and every great educational institution—to pursue the high calling of educating creative thinkers and bold leaders, of deepening human knowledge, and of promoting progress, justice, and human flourishing.
We affirm that:
Because the teaching, learning, research, and creativity that bring progress and change require debate and disagreement, diversity and difference are essential to academic excellence.
To prepare leaders for a complex world, Harvard must admit and educate a student body whose members reflect, and have lived, multiple facets of human experience. No part of what makes us who we are could ever be irrelevant.
Harvard must always be a place of opportunity, a place whose doors remain open to those to whom they had long been closed, a place where many will have the chance to live dreams their parents or grandparents could not have dreamed.
For almost a decade, Harvard has vigorously defended an admissions system that, as two federal courts ruled, fully complied with longstanding precedent. In the weeks and months ahead, drawing on the talent and expertise of our Harvard community, we will determine how to preserve, consistent with the Court’s new precedent, our essential values.

The heart of our extraordinary institution is its people. Harvard will continue to be a vibrant community whose members come from all walks of life, all over the world. To our students, faculty, staff, researchers, and alumni—past, present, and future—who call Harvard your home, please know that you are, and always will be, Harvard. Your remarkable contributions to our community and the world drive Harvard’s distinction. Nothing today has changed that.

Sincerely,

Lawrence S. Bacow
President, Harvard University

Sounds like bunch of BS to me

In other words, they're going to completely ignore the ruling and do everything possible to go around it.

Sure hope so

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing will change. Listen to a podcast from a few mos back w/ UC Berkeley admissions head who said that they look at other factors that imply race.

Well - you can’t use “other factors” to intentionally reach the same racially discriminatory result. If the Cal admissions head was claiming they use other data as a proxy for race to the same ends that the Court just outlawed, that’s still a violation.

But what if they are NOT using other data as a proxy for race/ethnicity? What if they use that zip code data simply for those ends: geographic diversity? That will still be legal. What if they use first gen data? That will still be legal. What if they try to get students from more rural and urban high schools v suburban high schools? That will still be legal. Or students with economic hardship? That will still be legal.

These are not proxies for race. They are entirely separate considerations and they are not outlawed (in my reading). But if they are please point me to the paragraph in the Opinion that shows otherwise.

This is exactly what will happen, it already has been happening for the past two cycles and this decision will just accelerate. Low income, first Gen, and rural will replace urm as a hook.

And to the other poster, the race box will disappear this cycle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get how this is going to work.

SO the universities are going to be trusted to remove the race data point---i.e. the "button" from the applications prior to review by the reader(s).

But then once the class is assembled they will have to re-connect race with pool of selected students so they can determine the demographics of their new student body?

I think this is going to get very interesting within one year.

IF they remove the "race" data point box prior to review
but then "guesstimate" race based on essays then they could be
estimating a class of say, 50% white, 25% black, 25% Asian

ONLY to end up with a class of
60% white, 35% Asian, 5% black based on people fudging their "racial hardship" essays, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asian-American students in our community have gained admission to elite schools over the years by presenting extracurriculars tied to their Saturday Schools as markers of "cultural authenticity" or ethnic "color." Being bilingual and functioning as leaders in their Chinese-American neighborhood = URM hook status. I kind of wonder if that will be a good strategy now. Maybe the implications of these lawsuits were not fully considered. Possibly this has all backfired.

Because they don't fully understand the landscape and assimilate to majority culture as much as they can. This ruling doesn't help them at all! The thought process seems to be the Black and Brown kids just don't belong with us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is Harvard’s response- in case it hasn’t yet been posted (didn’t read the entire thread)

Dear Members of the Harvard Community,

Today, the Supreme Court delivered its decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The Court held that Harvard College’s admissions system does not comply with the principles of the equal protection clause embodied in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The Court also ruled that colleges and universities may consider in admissions decisions “an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” We will certainly comply with the Court’s decision.

We write today to reaffirm the fundamental principle that deep and transformative teaching, learning, and research depend upon a community comprising people of many backgrounds, perspectives, and lived experiences. That principle is as true and important today as it was yesterday. So too are the abiding values that have enabled us—and every great educational institution—to pursue the high calling of educating creative thinkers and bold leaders, of deepening human knowledge, and of promoting progress, justice, and human flourishing.
We affirm that:
Because the teaching, learning, research, and creativity that bring progress and change require debate and disagreement, diversity and difference are essential to academic excellence.
To prepare leaders for a complex world, Harvard must admit and educate a student body whose members reflect, and have lived, multiple facets of human experience. No part of what makes us who we are could ever be irrelevant.
Harvard must always be a place of opportunity, a place whose doors remain open to those to whom they had long been closed, a place where many will have the chance to live dreams their parents or grandparents could not have dreamed.
For almost a decade, Harvard has vigorously defended an admissions system that, as two federal courts ruled, fully complied with longstanding precedent. In the weeks and months ahead, drawing on the talent and expertise of our Harvard community, we will determine how to preserve, consistent with the Court’s new precedent, our essential values.

The heart of our extraordinary institution is its people. Harvard will continue to be a vibrant community whose members come from all walks of life, all over the world. To our students, faculty, staff, researchers, and alumni—past, present, and future—who call Harvard your home, please know that you are, and always will be, Harvard. Your remarkable contributions to our community and the world drive Harvard’s distinction. Nothing today has changed that.

Sincerely,

Lawrence S. Bacow
President, Harvard University

Sounds like bunch of BS to me

In other words, they're going to completely ignore the ruling and do everything possible to go around it.

Yep. They say so in the very first paragraph "The Court also ruled that colleges and universities may consider in admissions decisions “an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” We will certainly comply with the Court’s decision." . Another lawsuit in about a decade?

This time with huge compensatory and punitive damages.

College will calculate the risks they can tolerate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, who cares if you can’t go to Harvard, or Yale or whatever? It’s just another label. Lots of people going to these schools who probably don’t deserve to be there. If you even remotely quality to go to Harvard, I think you’ll be just fine wherever you end up.

Harvard literally admits black folk with SAT scores lower than the typical student at UMBC

Says you. Even if it were true, it's a private institution.

A private institution that the Court determined broke the law by having separate admissions guidelines…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Poor kids are just as smart as white kids” - Joe Biden, 2019

Was this pre-dementia?

[Anonymous]

It’s no secret that the Party of Jefferson Davis and KKK has been and still is the party of racism. From anti-Black racism to anti-Asian racism. It still is the party of anti-Black racism today. In addition to anti-Asian. Chain them to the plantation of welfare and low expectations. They assume that Blacks are naturally intellectually inferior to Whites and Asians. That’s why they want to preserve AA. And welfare. To throw them a bone. To own them as their permanent voting base. The party of teacher unions. Anti-school choice. Anti-charter school. Anti-voucher. Somehow they are perfectly fine with low expectations and low academic standards for inner city and low income area public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, who cares if you can’t go to Harvard, or Yale or whatever? It’s just another label. Lots of people going to these schools who probably don’t deserve to be there. If you even remotely quality to go to Harvard, I think you’ll be just fine wherever you end up.

Harvard literally admits black folk with SAT scores lower than the typical student at UMBC

In the end, the bigger picture, you will thrive wherever you go. I just don’t understand the obsession with labels. If you are brilliant you are brilliant even at a county college, gasp, or a state school. Just go with the flow.

+1..The focus on Ivies is from a forgone era.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians shouldn’t get too excited. The good private schools will still do what they want to do. They don’t want to be overrun with too many Asian students. They’ll find a way to get around that hassle.

It's false. This idea that there's a cabal against Asian students is laughable and it shows that folks like you aren't as smart as you've convinced yourself.

The lawsuit already works. Asian presence at Harvard has been increasing for the past 2;years, since the lawsuit.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna77923

There are Asians (plenty) who still won't get in. Admissions ebb and flow, there's no telling that there's going to be a remarkable increase. These schools owe you nothing.

Why are Asians so obsessed with being discriminated against? Do they seem to have knowledge of all other applicants’ stats? What is all this uproar about? There are PLENTY of schools out there. Who cares about Harvard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get how this is going to work.

SO the universities are going to be trusted to remove the race data point---i.e. the "button" from the applications prior to review by the reader(s).

But then once the class is assembled they will have to re-connect race with pool of selected students so they can determine the demographics of their new student body?

I think this is going to get very interesting within one year.

IF they remove the "race" data point box prior to review
but then "guesstimate" race based on essays then they could be
estimating a class of say, 50% white, 25% black, 25% Asian

ONLY to end up with a class of
60% white, 35% Asian, 5% black based on people fudging their "racial hardship" essays, etc.

Terrible analysis. There is an abundance of socioeconomic intelligence available about applicants outside of the admissions package. Not many lacrosse players are writing hardship essays. But high school locations and counselors' oral recommendations are very information and actionable (and also undiscoverable).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians shouldn’t get too excited. The good private schools will still do what they want to do. They don’t want to be overrun with too many Asian students. They’ll find a way to get around that hassle.

It's false. This idea that there's a cabal against Asian students is laughable and it shows that folks like you aren't as smart as you've convinced yourself.

The lawsuit already works. Asian presence at Harvard has been increasing for the past 2;years, since the lawsuit.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna77923

There are Asians (plenty) who still won't get in. Admissions ebb and flow, there's no telling that there's going to be a remarkable increase. These schools owe you nothing.

Why are Asians so obsessed with being discriminated against? Do they seem to have knowledge of all other applicants’ stats? What is all this uproar about? There are PLENTY of schools out there. Who cares about Harvard?

Yes, there are PLENTY of good schools out there that URMs can go to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians shouldn’t get too excited. The good private schools will still do what they want to do. They don’t want to be overrun with too many Asian students. They’ll find a way to get around that hassle.

It's false. This idea that there's a cabal against Asian students is laughable and it shows that folks like you aren't as smart as you've convinced yourself.

The lawsuit already works. Asian presence at Harvard has been increasing for the past 2;years, since the lawsuit.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna77923

There are Asians (plenty) who still won't get in. Admissions ebb and flow, there's no telling that there's going to be a remarkable increase. These schools owe you nothing.

Why are Asians so obsessed with being discriminated against? Do they seem to have knowledge of all other applicants’ stats? What is all this uproar about? There are PLENTY of schools out there. Who cares about Harvard?

Your opinion - “who cares about Harvard?” - is irrelevant. Colleges are required to follow the law and Harvard was found to violate it. They can attract a diverse study body still but not by considering race and ethnicity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asian-American students in our community have gained admission to elite schools over the years by presenting extracurriculars tied to their Saturday Schools as markers of "cultural authenticity" or ethnic "color." Being bilingual and functioning as leaders in their Chinese-American neighborhood = URM hook status. I kind of wonder if that will be a good strategy now. Maybe the implications of these lawsuits were not fully considered. Possibly this has all backfired.

I dont get what you're saying as it's been harder to be admitted to the elite schools as Asian American. I know kids who purposefully left clubs off their application.

well, I'm not sure. I think for some the key was to embrace that cultural or ethnic identity to the max. Princeton AOs' comments on applications, made public via a lawsuit, showed how closely/almost obsessively they were looking for cultural color from Asian pre-med students. They rejected those who didn't aggressively project Asian identity but accepted those who did, of applicants with same stats. Yes, at least until now, Asian-American students have always been able to shape a platform for themselves as contributors to a diverse campus environment. Even being Southeast Asian vs. East Asian has been somewhat powerful. Asian diaspora is so diverse, some students had advantage that was just erased.