Reply to New TJ Lawsuit Filed 3/10/21 by Pacific Legal Foundation

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "New TJ Lawsuit Filed 3/10/21 by Pacific Legal Foundation "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Overwhelming public evidence exists that the new TJ admissions process was adopted with the purpose of disadvantaging Asian-American students and reducing Asian American enrollment at TJ. As such, these changes violate the Equal Protection Clause.

Helping URMs is a noble goal, but you cannot be biased against Asian Americans in the process.  The board essentially gerrymandered the application process to kneecap Asian Americans.  The intent is clear.

The application process needs to be redesigned by a board that doesn't hold stereotypes against Asian Americans.  The board didn't even pretend to be neutral.[/quote]

By definition increasing URM numbers at TJ will decrease Asian and White numbers- the math is really simple there. You're basically saying that desegregation is a per se violation of the equal protection clause because it necessarily disadvantages one race- good luck with that [/quote]

+1. This lawyer who wrote the Hill op-Ed piece is either a staggeringly poor lawyer or a staggeringly brilliant businesswoman. These families are going to end up paying gobs and gobs of legal fees - both their own and FCPS’ if the case is even heard - and it’s only going to get worse the further up they appeal.

And for what? If you’re the type of kid who is helped by the old admissions process, you’re also the type of kid whose college admissions prospects will be hurt by going to TJ over your base school. It just doesn’t add up.[/quote]

They are taking a stand against discrimination against them that is getting worse and worse.  You would have told Rosa Parks she was wasting her time.[/quote]

It’s not discrimination to remove a flawed metric that has little predictive value and conveys a demonstrable advantage to a particular cohort. It’s not discrimination to end de facto segregation.[/quote]

Let’s end the de facto segregation of judges and prosecutors by increasing Asian representation by instituting a lottery system. [/quote]

I’m okay with that. Now if we were to respond with how the opposition to reform responds, they would say:

“You’re anti-Black!”

“If they want to be judges they just need to work harder! Their families don’t value the legal system enough!”

“You just want the judges to be majority white. You want to make judges white again!”

Do you see how stupid those statements sound? [/quote]

Yes.  It sounds very stupid to discriminate against persons based on their race just because one race is underrepresented and the other is [b]over represented based on merit[/b].[/quote]

You can keep parroting this talking point until you're blue in the face, but it won't make it true.

Asians are not over-represented at TJ because of "merit". They are over-represented at TJ because:

a) Their community values academic prestige at a MUCH higher rate than all other communities in NoVa - which explains their over-representation among applicants; and

b) The previous admissions process strongly favored families who are willing and able to gear a student's entire childhood around optimizing that process - which explains their over-representation even when controlling for application numbers.

Choosing to sell out to getting into TJ from an early age is not merit.

[/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