Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)
Reply to "TJ admissions decision - repercussions for Class of 2026"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]From the bench, the judge noted that the school board was put on notice six months ago and to be prepared for this outcome, and the “inconvenience” they’re facing now after ignoring that warning does not warrant a stay. He agreed with the Coalition for TJ that forcing children to undergo another year (or more, as this case will likely be appealed) of a discriminatory admissions policy is irreparable harm, that the school board is not likely to succeed on its appeal to the Fourth Circuit, and that a stay wouldn’t serve the public interest.[/quote] Well, yes. He would say all of those things. There is relevant precedent to reference on both sides of this case. It’s up to each judge to essentially decide which precedent they want to follow, and at this point, judges are appointed based on their likelihood of referring to precedent that the appointee finds favorable. Whether or not the Fourth Circuit agrees is another matter entirely.[/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
