Lawsuit challenging MCPS magnet admissions dismissed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's absolutely NO shock that this baseless lawsuit was tossed.

It had 0 merit and was a joke.

I think what you read in the final judgement did not include all the evidence. I believe if you had seen all of the evidence, you would agree there was merit behind the lawsuit.

I did. It seems that the judge carefully weigh the evidence and concluded that there was no harm done. In other words this case never had any merit and was a waste of time.

DP. I have to disagree. In fact, I think this is an excellent way to smoke out and document which judges are bad eggs. All you have to do is compare the original complaints to the published ruling. If the ruling doesn't directly address the complaint, assuming the judge isn't completely incompetent, it's a clear indicator that something else is going on behind the scenes.

The wheels of justice roll slow (look at how long it's taking to nail Trump), but they do roll. MCPS CO has left such a huge trail of mistakes and carnage, eventually something's gotta give.

Maybe believing in these fictions makes you feel better, but the complaint just doesn't hold up to any scrutiny and was laughed out of court.

"Laughed out of court" is rude, dismissive, and disrespectful. It was a serious case and considered seriously by serious people. It was dismissed after thorough consideration.

Please at least respect that.

I believe it was largely ignored. This was not the only case. Not the only complaint.

The issue with this case was they were very selective in who was represented. If you look at the other complaints and cases, it's much more clear cut.

Other complaints about magnet admission? Can you link to the complaints in those cases?

[Anonymous]

Dismissing the case for insufficient "discriminatory intent" doesn't necessarily mean that discrimination did not occur - it just means the legal threshold wasn't met.

Didn't prove MCPS guilty, but it doesn't mean they didn't do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's absolutely NO shock that this baseless lawsuit was tossed.

It had 0 merit and was a joke.

I think what you read in the final judgement did not include all the evidence. I believe if you had seen all of the evidence, you would agree there was merit behind the lawsuit.

I did. It seems that the judge carefully weigh the evidence and concluded that there was no harm done. In other words this case never had any merit and was a waste of time.

DP. I have to disagree. In fact, I think this is an excellent way to smoke out and document which judges are bad eggs. All you have to do is compare the original complaints to the published ruling. If the ruling doesn't directly address the complaint, assuming the judge isn't completely incompetent, it's a clear indicator that something else is going on behind the scenes.

The wheels of justice roll slow (look at how long it's taking to nail Trump), but they do roll. MCPS CO has left such a huge trail of mistakes and carnage, eventually something's gotta give.

Maybe believing in these fictions makes you feel better, but the complaint just doesn't hold up to any scrutiny and was laughed out of court.

"Laughed out of court" is rude, dismissive, and disrespectful. It was a serious case and considered seriously by serious people. It was dismissed after thorough consideration.

Please at least respect that.

I believe it was largely ignored. This was not the only case. Not the only complaint.

The issue with this case was they were very selective in who was represented. If you look at the other complaints and cases, it's much more clear cut.

Other complaints about magnet admission? Can you link to the complaints in those cases?

Ask the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights for the complete list of who filed with them (not just the ones they took).

[Anonymous]

https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/civil-rights-groups-file-amicus-brief-in-support-of-dismissing-montgomery-county-md-magnet-school-admissions-case/

Today, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC, Latino Justice PRLDEF, and Ballard Spahr LLP filed an amicus brief on behalf of Black, Latino, and Asian American organizations in support of dismissing Association for Education Fairness v. Montgomery County Board of Education, a lawsuit that seeks to prevent school districts from promoting equality for all students through race-neutral admissions policies.

[Anonymous]

I’m not sure about the legal merits of this case. But I’m starting to feel like this “equity” business is going to be the school busing of our generation. I’m all in favor of expanding access to gifted programs to underrepresented groups. But doing that through destroying existing programs is just really nihilistic. EXPAND the accelerated options; don’t water them down or exclude qualified students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure about the legal merits of this case. But I’m starting to feel like this “equity” business is going to be the school busing of our generation. I’m all in favor of expanding access to gifted programs to underrepresented groups. But doing that through destroying existing programs is just really nihilistic. EXPAND the accelerated options; don’t water them down or exclude qualified students.

Instead of expanding the opportunities to all students, I wonder why they deny opportunities to highly abled to promote some groups. Is this their politics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/civil-rights-groups-file-amicus-brief-in-support-of-dismissing-montgomery-county-md-magnet-school-admissions-case/

Today, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC, Latino Justice PRLDEF, and Ballard Spahr LLP filed an amicus brief on behalf of Black, Latino, and Asian American organizations in support of dismissing Association for Education Fairness v. Montgomery County Board of Education, a lawsuit that seeks to prevent school districts from promoting equality for all students through race-neutral admissions policies.

They injected themselves in December 2021.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/civil-rights-groups-file-amicus-brief-in-support-of-dismissing-montgomery-county-md-magnet-school-admissions-case/

Today, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC, Latino Justice PRLDEF, and Ballard Spahr LLP filed an amicus brief on behalf of Black, Latino, and Asian American organizations in support of dismissing Association for Education Fairness v. Montgomery County Board of Education, a lawsuit that seeks to prevent school districts from promoting equality for all students through race-neutral admissions policies.

They injected themselves in December 2021.

But this was in February 2022.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dismissing the case for insufficient "discriminatory intent" doesn't necessarily mean that discrimination did not occur - it just means the legal threshold wasn't met.

Didn't prove MCPS guilty, but it doesn't mean they didn't do it.

Since the case was dismissed, I'd say they were cleared of any wrongdoing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure about the legal merits of this case. But I’m starting to feel like this “equity” business is going to be the school busing of our generation. I’m all in favor of expanding access to gifted programs to underrepresented groups. But doing that through destroying existing programs is just really nihilistic. EXPAND the accelerated options; don’t water them down or exclude qualified students.

Instead of expanding the opportunities to all students, I wonder why they deny opportunities to highly abled to promote some groups. Is this their politics?

They don't. In fact, admissions to these programs are race-blind, and it's why some demographic groups which currently take up over half the seats in these programs while others that are even larger are closer to 5%...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dismissing the case for insufficient "discriminatory intent" doesn't necessarily mean that discrimination did not occur - it just means the legal threshold wasn't met.

Didn't prove MCPS guilty, but it doesn't mean they didn't do it.

Since the case was dismissed, I'd say they were cleared of any wrongdoing.

+1. Especially in a civil case on a motion to dismiss where inferences are drawn in favor of the plaintiffs, rather than the criminal trial from which PP is importing language of guilt. There just wasn't a plausible case that the protected rights of Asian students were violated here. If anyone here has well articulated reason they think the judge got it wrong, I haven't seen it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure about the legal merits of this case. But I’m starting to feel like this “equity” business is going to be the school busing of our generation. I’m all in favor of expanding access to gifted programs to underrepresented groups. But doing that through destroying existing programs is just really nihilistic. EXPAND the accelerated options; don’t water them down or exclude qualified students.

Instead of expanding the opportunities to all students, I wonder why they deny opportunities to highly abled to promote some groups. Is this their politics?

They don't. In fact, admissions to these programs are race-blind, and it's why some demographic groups which currently take up over half the seats in these programs while others that are even larger are closer to 5%...

So why are they not providing magnet opportunities for highly abled and only focus on certain groups? Aren't they suppose to provide opportunities for all children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dismissing the case for insufficient "discriminatory intent" doesn't necessarily mean that discrimination did not occur - it just means the legal threshold wasn't met.

Didn't prove MCPS guilty, but it doesn't mean they didn't do it.

Since the case was dismissed, I'd say they were cleared of any wrongdoing.

+1. Especially in a civil case on a motion to dismiss where inferences are drawn in favor of the plaintiffs, rather than the criminal trial from which PP is importing language of guilt. There just wasn't a plausible case that the protected rights of Asian students were violated here. If anyone here has well articulated reason they think the judge got it wrong, I haven't seen it.

There was that complaint that MCPS was caught grade tampering an asian kid's assignment grades (A's to D's), not grading assignments, not recording graded assignments, etc.. There was a stack of documentation and the P even admitted it happened, but claimed that changing the grades back wouldn't matter. Honestly, I thought she and the one teacher involved should have been removed for that, but apparently someone gave her top-cover?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dismissing the case for insufficient "discriminatory intent" doesn't necessarily mean that discrimination did not occur - it just means the legal threshold wasn't met.

Didn't prove MCPS guilty, but it doesn't mean they didn't do it.

Since the case was dismissed, I'd say they were cleared of any wrongdoing.

+1. Especially in a civil case on a motion to dismiss where inferences are drawn in favor of the plaintiffs, rather than the criminal trial from which PP is importing language of guilt. There just wasn't a plausible case that the protected rights of Asian students were violated here. If anyone here has well articulated reason they think the judge got it wrong, I haven't seen it.

There was that complaint that MCPS was caught grade tampering an asian kid's assignment grades (A's to D's), not grading assignments, not recording graded assignments, etc.. There was a stack of documentation and the P even admitted it happened, but claimed that changing the grades back wouldn't matter. Honestly, I thought she and the one teacher involved should have been removed for that, but apparently someone gave her top-cover?

Documentation please. This.is is far too serious a subject for anonymous anecdotal whispers. Actual Documentation from a court or somewhere that is legally bound to truthful testimony. Please. Documentation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure about the legal merits of this case. But I’m starting to feel like this “equity” business is going to be the school busing of our generation. I’m all in favor of expanding access to gifted programs to underrepresented groups. But doing that through destroying existing programs is just really nihilistic. EXPAND the accelerated options; don’t water them down or exclude qualified students.

Instead of expanding the opportunities to all students, I wonder why they deny opportunities to highly abled to promote some groups. Is this their politics?

They don't. In fact, admissions to these programs are race-blind, and it's why some demographic groups which currently take up over half the seats in these programs while others that are even larger are closer to 5%...

So why are they not providing magnet opportunities for highly abled and only focus on certain groups? Aren't they suppose to provide opportunities for all children?

There are opportunities for all kids. But perhaps not the opportunity you think Larla so obviously deserves.