Court: TJ's New Admission Policy Does Not Discriminate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Alito, Thomas, Barrett, Gorsuch - that’s enough to grant cert right there.

Barrett wasn’t interested last time.

She tends to vote against emergency cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Harvard and UNC cases represent much easier angles of attack on affirmative action than this case.

I think in reality, we’ll have to see the reasoning for how those cases are decided before we have a good idea if this one will be taken up.

Those who wish to reestablish the old status quo would be better served turning their attention to the School Board elections - those will be decided LONG before the Supreme Court even decides whether to take this up. But the GOP nominated a confirmed wife-beater to one of their most accessible seats, so…

The FCPS School Board is probably a lost cause but it’s telling that the state - which has the final say over Governor’s Schools - filed an amicus brief supporting the Coalition.

The state is welcome to act in any way they want to whenever they want. I think it’s more telling that nearly 18 months into the Youngkin administration, with all of the promises they made to the Indian community in Northern Virginia, there’s been no action from them AT ALL.

They eliminated VMPI. Lots of kids will be able to take algebra in middle school in coming years because of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Much has changed. That was an appeal about a stay, while this is the actual case.

So? The material facts haven’t changed at all. If the new admissions policy is unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then as well - and by the time the Court actually opines on the case, there may be three new classes at TJ selected in between: 2026, 2027, and 2028. It’s either a problem
or it isn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Alito, Thomas, Barrett, Gorsuch - that’s enough to grant cert right there.

Barrett wasn’t interested last time.

She tends to vote against emergency cases.

That’s a reach. If this were really a big deal worth litigating, why would she let three classes be selected under an unconstitutional policy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Harvard and UNC cases represent much easier angles of attack on affirmative action than this case.

I think in reality, we’ll have to see the reasoning for how those cases are decided before we have a good idea if this one will be taken up.

Those who wish to reestablish the old status quo would be better served turning their attention to the School Board elections - those will be decided LONG before the Supreme Court even decides whether to take this up. But the GOP nominated a confirmed wife-beater to one of their most accessible seats, so…

The FCPS School Board is probably a lost cause but it’s telling that the state - which has the final say over Governor’s Schools - filed an amicus brief supporting the Coalition.

The state is welcome to act in any way they want to whenever they want. I think it’s more telling that nearly 18 months into the Youngkin administration, with all of the promises they made to the Indian community in Northern Virginia, there’s been no action from them AT ALL.

They eliminated VMPI. Lots of kids will be able to take algebra in middle school in coming years because of this.

Does that help protect Indian access to TJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Much has changed. That was an appeal about a stay, while this is the actual case.

So? The material facts haven’t changed at all. If the new admissions policy is unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then as well - and by the time the Court actually opines on the case, there may be three new classes at TJ selected in between: 2026, 2027, and 2028. It’s either a problem
or it isn’t.

Courts tend to take their time on decisions, and a ruling on a stay is considerably different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Much has changed. That was an appeal about a stay, while this is the actual case.

So? The material facts haven’t changed at all. If the new admissions policy is unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then as well - and by the time the Court actually opines on the case, there may be three new classes at TJ selected in between: 2026, 2027, and 2028. It’s either a problem
or it isn’t.

Courts tend to take their time on decisions, and a ruling on a stay is considerably different.

A ruling on a stay is a ruling of likelihood of success on the merits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Much has changed. That was an appeal about a stay, while this is the actual case.

So? The material facts haven’t changed at all. If the new admissions policy is unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then as well - and by the time the Court actually opines on the case, there may be three new classes at TJ selected in between: 2026, 2027, and 2028. It’s either a problem
or it isn’t.

Courts tend to take their time on decisions, and a ruling on a stay is considerably different.

A ruling on a stay is a ruling of likelihood of success on the merits.

ding ding ding

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Much has changed. That was an appeal about a stay, while this is the actual case.

So? The material facts haven’t changed at all. If the new admissions policy is unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then as well - and by the time the Court actually opines on the case, there may be three new classes at TJ selected in between: 2026, 2027, and 2028. It’s either a problem
or it isn’t.

Courts tend to take their time on decisions, and a ruling on a stay is considerably different.

A ruling on a stay is a ruling of likelihood of success on the merits.

They were asking for an emergency stay, jumping ahead of the 4th circuit decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Much has changed. That was an appeal about a stay, while this is the actual case.

So? The material facts haven’t changed at all. If the new admissions policy is unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then as well - and by the time the Court actually opines on the case, there may be three new classes at TJ selected in between: 2026, 2027, and 2028. It’s either a problem
or it isn’t.

Courts tend to take their time on decisions, and a ruling on a stay is considerably different.

A ruling on a stay is a ruling of likelihood of success on the merits.

They were asking for an emergency stay, jumping ahead of the 4th circuit decision.

It's almost as if 90% of commenters saying "this is now settled" because of the emergency stay issue have never read about nor understand anything about the supreme court. It is very normal for the supreme court to let a case work its way through the lower courts before it is willing to touch it. I suppose it's wishful thinking on the part of those who hate asians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just.wait.for.the.Supreme.Court.

The appeals court decided 2-1 as per party lines. 2 Obama appointees - 1 Trump appointee.

The Supreme Court is differently constituted.

So hold your horses and your anti- Asian diatribes.

It ain’t over till it’s over.

If a new school were opened and they used the current TJ admissions policy, it would not be considered racially discriminatory. The bigger problem is even if they are selecting Asians, they are not selecting the top Asian students within a school, though this might be different at the big feeders. TJ is missing out on many top students.

TJ has always missed out on many top students. It’s just missing out on a (VERY) slightly different group of them now.

This. There were always kids at the "wrong schools" who didn't have the same parental resources or PTA support who could have thrived at TJ but were not getting in.
Also the idea that all potential is determined by the time a kid is 13 or 14 just seems short sighted and really cruel when it's talked about on these boards. "Oh my God some child got in who was only in Algebra 2 Honors in 8th grade, they're dumbing down the school and all is lost." "Those kids can't handle the pressure and will drop out" "What if the school drops to second best in the country because of them?"
I think the idea that TJ could help a passionate kid who didn't have the same opportunities reach their full potential is much more impressive than missing out on a kid who will have all the opportunities or support at Mclean or Langley.
No policy will make everyone happy or is perfect, but honestly I think these new changes could actually make TJ useful to the County beyond a press release saying they are the number one school in the country or a parent being able to brag at a cocktail party.
Signed a TJ grad from seemingly a saner time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just.wait.for.the.Supreme.Court.

The appeals court decided 2-1 as per party lines. 2 Obama appointees - 1 Trump appointee.

The Supreme Court is differently constituted.

So hold your horses and your anti- Asian diatribes.

It ain’t over till it’s over.

If a new school were opened and they used the current TJ admissions policy, it would not be considered racially discriminatory. The bigger problem is even if they are selecting Asians, they are not selecting the top Asian students within a school, though this might be different at the big feeders. TJ is missing out on many top students.

TJ has always missed out on many top students. It’s just missing out on a (VERY) slightly different group of them now.

This. There were always kids at the "wrong schools" who didn't have the same parental resources or PTA support who could have thrived at TJ but were not getting in.
Also the idea that all potential is determined by the time a kid is 13 or 14 just seems short sighted and really cruel when it's talked about on these boards. "Oh my God some child got in who was only in Algebra 2 Honors in 8th grade, they're dumbing down the school and all is lost." "Those kids can't handle the pressure and will drop out" "What if the school drops to second best in the country because of them?"
I think the idea that TJ could help a passionate kid who didn't have the same opportunities reach their full potential is much more impressive than missing out on a kid who will have all the opportunities or support at Mclean or Langley.
No policy will make everyone happy or is perfect, but honestly I think these new changes could actually make TJ useful to the County beyond a press release saying they are the number one school in the country or a parent being able to brag at a cocktail party.
Signed a TJ grad from seemingly a saner time

I love this perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why can't any of you read? This was a procedural decision - it means nothing - the case continues on. That is all.

It was not a procedural decision. The case will continue on only if SCOTUS grants cert, which is far from a given.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Alito, Thomas, Barrett, Gorsuch - that’s enough to grant cert right there.

Barrett wasn’t interested last time.

She tends to vote against emergency cases.

That’s a reach. If this were really a big deal worth litigating, why would she let three classes be selected under an unconstitutional policy?

DP. Are you familiar with how SCOTUS works? There are lots of issues of far greater importance than this where SCOTUS repeatedly rejects cert petitions for years while allowing the issue to percolate before eventually taking it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so glad that the Court dug into Asra’s lame attempt to turn the text messages and emails into “the TJ papers”.

The depths of her bad faith know no bounds. An embarrassment to her family - including, quite publicly, her son - her race, her community, her profession, and the institutions that have employed and continue to employ her.

Sadly, her attempts to burn everything to the ground will have her laughing all the way to the bank, but at what cost?

A district court and one appellate judge on the three-member 4th Circuit panel agreed with the Coalition’s claims. If the case reaches the Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit decision stands a good chance of being reversed. Realistically, everyone involved in this litigation knew there would be multiple appeals.

1) That’s a big, big if. It’s a weak case, full stop. It’s hard to see how the Supreme Court benefits at all from granting cert in this case.

2) The Court already had a shot at this when the Coalition requested that the 4th Circuit’s original stay back at this time last year be vacated. They voted 6-3 not to vacate, leaving the process up and running for the Class of 2026. Not much has changed since then.

Alito, Thomas, Barrett, Gorsuch - that’s enough to grant cert right there.

Barrett wasn’t interested last time.

She tends to vote against emergency cases.

That’s a reach. If this were really a big deal worth litigating, why would she let three classes be selected under an unconstitutional policy?

DP. Are you familiar with how SCOTUS works? There are lots of issues of far greater importance than this where SCOTUS repeatedly rejects cert petitions for years while allowing the issue to percolate before eventually taking it up.

I am. But I appreciate your acknowledgment that this issue isn’t enough of big of a deal for four justices to have voted simply to grant an emergency stay.