Reply to What are the new TJ feeders

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "What are the new TJ feeders"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The decisions are not race blind, there wouldn’t be a box for race if they were.

As for the comment about playing basketball for 5 hours…  Basketballs are inexpensive and there are free courts all around. You don’t need the internet or transportation. Lots of kids are playing basketball, not many are doing math for fun. A smart kid is not seeing other kids doing math in that neighborhood. Environment matters and we all know it.[/quote]

Race is considered and the most important factor under the current admissions system. [/quote]

Considering race sounds illegal. I'm pretty sure they CAN'T do that and if they did there would be lawsuits.[/quote]

There was a lawsuit filed by parents of Asian students.

They won, initially.

The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, reversed.  After that, the parents sought certiori to the S.Ct.

Unlike the misinformation distributed by FCPS, the county DID NOT “WIN” AT THE SUPREME COURT LEVEL.

The court denied certiori, which they can do for myriad reasons.  Those reasons are rarely divulged.

[b]For all we know, the Court agreed with the Asian parents claim FCPS unlawfully discriminated against TJ applicants on the basis of race.[/b]

IMO, what FCPS has done is, at best, employ “proxies” for race, meaning FARMS kids are more likely to be URMs (LatinX / Black), and that capping the big 3 at 1.5% would more likely yield kids from MS with fewer Asian / Indian kids.

Using proxies can achieve the same or similar racial outcomes, but  it would allow FCPS to make misleading claims it did not directly consider race (not individually, anyway).

[/quote]

It would be quite a staggering indictment of this Court if they believed that the petitioner in a very high-profile case was in the right on a matter of civil rights and declined to hear the case.

The far more likely explanation is that the petitioners didn't do enough to make their case for anyone other than Alito and Thomas.[/quote]

It happens all...the...time.
They don't just grant certiori to overturn cases, they also grant it to uphold a lower court's ruling.

I think it is likely that if they did take the case, they would have overturned the lower court and reason I believe this is because a dissent was filed to the denial of cert.
Alito and Thomas aren't mad because the court didn't accept the case and then uphold the TJ admissions process.  They are mad because they are pretty sure that if they did take the case, the court would have overturned the lower court and they felt the other conservative members of the court were being... well... too conservative.  They were not willing to adopt sweeping change in the TJ case on the heels of sweeping change in the SFFA case.

Taking a case like this so close to SFFA before they see how SFFA changes the landscape might be premature.  The issue may not be ripe enough for many members of the court regardless of how they would rule if forced to do so right now.  They simply didn't want to do so right now.
If they thought the court was likely to support FCPS, it would be Jackson and Sotomayor writing a dissent to the denial of cert and calling the rest of the court cowards for not taking the case.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics