SCOTUS outlaws race as college admissions factor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that considering skin color as a factor in admitting someone to college, approving someone for a loan, or anything else for that matter is one of the most awful things humans can do to one another. We're all god's children. Do better people.

It's not just skin color. There is culture and history associated with that color. As a black woman, I don't want a colorblind society. I just want to be given the same opportunities. While there are some traumas that come with being black, there's a rich culture there too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:getting rid of affirmative action is not going to stop white people from thinking people of color are taking their spots. As a black person, I got a 168 on my LSAT. had a 3.8 GPA, worked 4 campus jobs, worked an internship EVERY summer and I still got shady comments from white students how they would be screwed compared to me because they were not minority. As if my qualifications were less. some of the folks saying this didn't even crack 160 or have a 3.5 GPA and barely did 1 internship.

In law school I was in top 8% of my class. but folks swore I was at the bottom taking job offers from y'all. 14 years into my career I'm a partner at a big law firm. Y'all would assume it is only for diversity reasons and overlook all the cases I won, big business I brought in and top billing. It's funny how folks use to clutch their pearls in disbelief that I was in the top 3 producing associates 7 consecutive years. Like it wasn't possible for a black person to do this. no matter what the merits are, white people love to ASSUME that no one else could ever possibly achieve more than them. So even without AA folks will still find a way to complain about people of color taking their jobs or getting into top universities.

I can identify with your story. 20 years ago, I interned for a federal agency in D.C. At the end of the internship, each intern had to present their project to the senior leadership, management and other analyst in the division--about 200 people. I put a lot of thought and prep work into my presentation--as I did throughout my internship. On a Monday morning I was chatting with a colleague (new analyst) that sat in the cubicle across from me. She was a white woman and always pleasant to me. We had our normal "what did you do this weekend" conversation at 8am. I told her I spent the weekend in the office preparing for my presentation and was nervous etc. She said "you'll do fine. besides, it doesn't matter. the federal government needs minorities anyway. you've got the right skin color. so you can fail the presentation. you'll still get a job offer." What a horrible thing to say. She completely ignored my work ethic and the great job I was doing. and it was in that moment that I realized it doesn't matter how hard I work. everyone will assume my success is because of affirmative action. And it was also at that moment I had to learn to let it go because that's heavy mental crap to carry forward. So like the other poster said--I now don't care what people think. anyone who cares can read my stats and know you can't get that by just having a dark skin tone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that considering skin color as a factor in admitting someone to college, approving someone for a loan, or anything else for that matter is one of the most awful things humans can do to one another. We're all god's children. Do better people.

It's not just skin color. There is culture and history associated with that color. As a black woman, I don't want a colorblind society. I just want to be given the same opportunities. While there are some traumas that come with being black, there's a rich culture there too.

A very rich culture that should be celebrated indeed! Equal opportunity from birth for every child should be our country's number one priority. We'll never get to the point at which there is a completely level playing field for all but we could do so, so, so much better considering the wealth we have in this country. Unfortunately, young children don't have a vote to buy so it isn't advantageous for politicians to focus their efforts on helping kids living in poverty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's think about this honestly. You can be against affirmative action, but a black or brown kid did not take your spot.

Let's see how this works at an ivy league school: the vast majority of students come from legacy, athletics (club sports like crew, lacross and squash), donors and faculty. Then, you have early admission, but you have to have the funds to commit. All of which, I might add, have NOTHING to do with merit.

That leaves the rest to fight for a spot. Do you think those above are coming from black and brown students? Absolutely not.

So, your kid is still going to have a terribly difficult time getting into an ivy unless you fit one of those categories.

So in effect, the SC did what America has done throughout its history - create division among all of the have nots.

Yes absolutely Asians were losing spots to URMs.

"Harvard itself found in a 2013 internal study that, if it admitted applicants solely on the basis of academic merit, its share of Asian American students would explode from 19 percent to 43 percent. Preferences for legacies and athletes have propped up the white share of students admitted. (One analysis finds the effect of those “pales in comparison” to the diversity benefits stemming from racial preferences.) Asian Americans are punished by both forms of preferences."

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/02/the-left-is-gaslighting-asian-americans-on-school-admissions.html

In one of the concurring opinions: JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR apparently believes that race conscious admission programs can somehow increase the chances that members of certain races (blacks and Hispanics) are admitted without decreasing the
chances of admission for members of other races (Asians). This simply defies mathematics.

There is no Hispanic racial group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:getting rid of affirmative action is not going to stop white people from thinking people of color are taking their spots. As a black person, I got a 168 on my LSAT. had a 3.8 GPA, worked 4 campus jobs, worked an internship EVERY summer and I still got shady comments from white students how they would be screwed compared to me because they were not minority. As if my qualifications were less. some of the folks saying this didn't even crack 160 or have a 3.5 GPA and barely did 1 internship.

In law school I was in top 8% of my class. but folks swore I was at the bottom taking job offers from y'all. 14 years into my career I'm a partner at a big law firm. Y'all would assume it is only for diversity reasons and overlook all the cases I won, big business I brought in and top billing. It's funny how folks use to clutch their pearls in disbelief that I was in the top 3 producing associates 7 consecutive years. Like it wasn't possible for a black person to do this. no matter what the merits are, white people love to ASSUME that no one else could ever possibly achieve more than them. So even without AA folks will still find a way to complain about people of color taking their jobs or getting into top universities.

I am a black lawyer who did not do great on the LSAT. I am sure that I got into law school because of affirmative action. However, I finished in the top 5% of my class. Clearly, I deserved to be there. Personally, I don't care what white people think of me. I know that I am the CEO of a company and I'm pretty sure that given its success, it is not because I was a diversity hire, but because I'm damn good at what I do.

Asians are even worse than whites in their belief that POC (which they once were) are intellectually inferior and need handouts to succeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

Are you even listening to yourself and not embarrassed by what you're saying? The Asian community is NOT a monolith. I repeat. We are not all tiger moms and we're not all rich nor are we all great in math. My kids don't have straight As. They play sports, not chess. We wouldn't even think of applying to Harvard. We'd be happy if they get into UMCP. What the hell is wrong with you? What we don't want however, is for people to discriminate against my kids and make it more difficult for them to get into schools more than non-Asian kids because of some stereotype or racial bias that you hold against us. Got it? Is that too much to ask?

You say that Asian students are not a monolith but you assume every Asian student was discrinated against because they were rejected by Harvard? Make it make sense.

PP is not saying they were discriminated against. And, pp is not saying ALL Asian students are discriminated against.
The reason the law was changed was because the Supreme Court found that Asian students were discriminated against. Based on the evidence presented to the court. And, they were. Just as they are at other schools. And, not only universities.

Oh please. The SC wanted to get rid of affirmative action and put a target on the backs of Asian kids. Why is it that most Asian students at Harvard did not agree with this case, nor did any of the Asian civil rights groups. They knew that Asians were being used.

+1. South Asian here. Expect to see the right-wing now turn against the Asians and claim that they make universities "too competitive". One only needs to look at the Real Estate Forum and see how people are uncomfortable with the growing Indian communities in eastern Loudoun County.

So fear of right wing nutjobs justifies racism by left wing nutjobs?

Newbies fresh off the boat have no knowledge of this country's history of using certain groups, including the model minority groups, as a buffer to maintain the status quo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that considering skin color as a factor in admitting someone to college, approving someone for a loan, or anything else for that matter is one of the most awful things humans can do to one another. We're all god's children. Do better people.

Apparently no, we can't all agree on this.

[Anonymous]

I have read this whole thread and still have not seen a single argument for raced based admissions. Just vague statements about I institutional racism. I still don't understand what the color of my skin should affect my life story, what I've had to overcome, or what privilege I've had. Someone actually spell it out please. Again, we are not talking socioeconomic status, only color of skin. Explain to me why Obama's daughters should get preference for the color of their skin vs poor white coal minor's daughter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can all agree that considering skin color as a factor in admitting someone to college, approving someone for a loan, or anything else for that matter is one of the most awful things humans can do to one another. We're all god's children. Do better people.

Apparently no, we can't all agree on this.

Yes, there will always be a few backwoods racists out there but I think all of us in the general public with an IQ over 80 can agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have read this whole thread and still have not seen a single argument for raced based admissions. Just vague statements about I institutional racism. I still don't understand what the color of my skin should affect my life story, what I've had to overcome, or what privilege I've had. Someone actually spell it out please. Again, we are not talking socioeconomic status, only color of skin. Explain to me why Obama's daughters should get preference for the color of their skin vs poor white coal minor's daughter.

No one ever said Obama's kids should get preferential treatment or anyone else should get preferential treatment because of skin color. At least I hope they didn't! If they did, the racists are coming out of the closet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:getting rid of affirmative action is not going to stop white people from thinking people of color are taking their spots. As a black person, I got a 168 on my LSAT. had a 3.8 GPA, worked 4 campus jobs, worked an internship EVERY summer and I still got shady comments from white students how they would be screwed compared to me because they were not minority. As if my qualifications were less. some of the folks saying this didn't even crack 160 or have a 3.5 GPA and barely did 1 internship.

In law school I was in top 8% of my class. but folks swore I was at the bottom taking job offers from y'all. 14 years into my career I'm a partner at a big law firm. Y'all would assume it is only for diversity reasons and overlook all the cases I won, big business I brought in and top billing. It's funny how folks use to clutch their pearls in disbelief that I was in the top 3 producing associates 7 consecutive years. Like it wasn't possible for a black person to do this. no matter what the merits are, white people love to ASSUME that no one else could ever possibly achieve more than them. So even without AA folks will still find a way to complain about people of color taking their jobs or getting into top universities.

I can identify with your story. 20 years ago, I interned for a federal agency in D.C. At the end of the internship, each intern had to present their project to the senior leadership, management and other analyst in the division--about 200 people. I put a lot of thought and prep work into my presentation--as I did throughout my internship. On a Monday morning I was chatting with a colleague (new analyst) that sat in the cubicle across from me. She was a white woman and always pleasant to me. We had our normal "what did you do this weekend" conversation at 8am. I told her I spent the weekend in the office preparing for my presentation and was nervous etc. She said "you'll do fine. besides, it doesn't matter. the federal government needs minorities anyway. you've got the right skin color. so you can fail the presentation. you'll still get a job offer." What a horrible thing to say. She completely ignored my work ethic and the great job I was doing. and it was in that moment that I realized it doesn't matter how hard I work. everyone will assume my success is because of affirmative action. And it was also at that moment I had to learn to let it go because that's heavy mental crap to carry forward. So like the other poster said--I now don't care what people think. anyone who cares can read my stats and know you can't get that by just having a dark skin tone.

The good news is that we can solve this by eliminating all affirmative action entirely, in admissions, hiring, government set asides, etc. and it will be win-win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have read this whole thread and still have not seen a single argument for raced based admissions. Just vague statements about I institutional racism. I still don't understand what the color of my skin should affect my life story, what I've had to overcome, or what privilege I've had. Someone actually spell it out please. Again, we are not talking socioeconomic status, only color of skin. Explain to me why Obama's daughters should get preference for the color of their skin vs poor white coal minor's daughter.

what you fail to see is that affirmative action and diversity considerations ALSO help the "poor white coal minor's daughter." I was an admission counselor. I wasn't in coal region. but farming is similar. the poor white kids from the farming communities that were border line admits got preference points coming from "low income community" in our admission model. We admitted far more poor white folks from rural USA than inner city urban kids. Diversity considerations go beyond just skin. These decisions erode all considerations and screw not just the incur city dark people that y'all hate, but your friendly, but poor farmer or coal miner kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's think about this honestly. You can be against affirmative action, but a black or brown kid did not take your spot.

Let's see how this works at an ivy league school: the vast majority of students come from legacy, athletics (club sports like crew, lacross and squash), donors and faculty. Then, you have early admission, but you have to have the funds to commit. All of which, I might add, have NOTHING to do with merit.

That leaves the rest to fight for a spot. Do you think those above are coming from black and brown students? Absolutely not.

So, your kid is still going to have a terribly difficult time getting into an ivy unless you fit one of those categories.

So in effect, the SC did what America has done throughout its history - create division among all of the have nots.

Yes absolutely Asians were losing spots to URMs.

"Harvard itself found in a 2013 internal study that, if it admitted applicants solely on the basis of academic merit, its share of Asian American students would explode from 19 percent to 43 percent. Preferences for legacies and athletes have propped up the white share of students admitted. (One analysis finds the effect of those “pales in comparison” to the diversity benefits stemming from racial preferences.) Asian Americans are punished by both forms of preferences."

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/02/the-left-is-gaslighting-asian-americans-on-school-admissions.html

In one of the concurring opinions: JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR apparently believes that race conscious admission programs can somehow increase the chances that members of certain races (blacks and Hispanics) are admitted without decreasing the
chances of admission for members of other races (Asians). This simply defies mathematics.

Test scores are not the only or even the best measure of merit. Stop making that bad-faith inference.

No one said they were. Just quitting harvard's own study, which they then tried to bury.

I agree with you. Academic achievement isn't all that. So can we just agree then that Harvard can set whatever standards they want and judge each applicant to see if he/she meets that standard on their own merit?

That wouldn't make you happy either. You'd still complain that unqualified URMs were being picked above Asian students. Clearly those students picked above other "qualified Asian students" are unqualified to attend Harvard because they are flunking out....wait, let me check Google...no they aren't flunking out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have read this whole thread and still have not seen a single argument for raced based admissions. Just vague statements about I institutional racism. I still don't understand what the color of my skin should affect my life story, what I've had to overcome, or what privilege I've had. Someone actually spell it out please. Again, we are not talking socioeconomic status, only color of skin. Explain to me why Obama's daughters should get preference for the color of their skin vs poor white coal minor's daughter.

what you fail to see is that affirmative action and diversity considerations ALSO help the "poor white coal minor's daughter." I was an admission counselor. I wasn't in coal region. but farming is similar. the poor white kids from the farming communities that were border line admits got preference points coming from "low income community" in our admission model. We admitted far more poor white folks from rural USA than inner city urban kids. Diversity considerations go beyond just skin. These decisions erode all considerations and screw not just the incur city dark people that y'all hate, but your friendly, but poor farmer or coal miner kid.

No other group benefitted from AA more than white women. I don't see anyone here complaining about gender discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have read this whole thread and still have not seen a single argument for raced based admissions. Just vague statements about I institutional racism. I still don't understand what the color of my skin should affect my life story, what I've had to overcome, or what privilege I've had. Someone actually spell it out please. Again, we are not talking socioeconomic status, only color of skin. Explain to me why Obama's daughters should get preference for the color of their skin vs poor white coal minor's daughter.

what you fail to see is that affirmative action and diversity considerations ALSO help the "poor white coal minor's daughter." I was an admission counselor. I wasn't in coal region. but farming is similar. the poor white kids from the farming communities that were border line admits got preference points coming from "low income community" in our admission model. We admitted far more poor white folks from rural USA than inner city urban kids. Diversity considerations go beyond just skin. These decisions erode all considerations and screw not just the incur city dark people that y'all hate, but your friendly, but poor farmer or coal miner kid.

No other group benefitted from AA more than white women. I don't see anyone here complaining about gender discrimination.

SO TRUE! another fact folks like to ignore.