Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

I heard Jackson ask whether if you have 2 kids, one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and gone to UNC for 5 generations, and one whose family has lived in NC for 5 generations and could not go to UNC for 5 generations because of slavery, could they each say it was important to them to go to UNC for those reasons and could UNC consider each of those stories as factors and the plaintiffs' lawyer basically said UNC could consider the first and not the second (though he did say UNC could refuse to consider the first, and could consider first gen or low SES students).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Nothing in America is colorblind.

Which is the cause of many problems.

The cause of many problems is that most white Americans don’t care that they benefit from systematically racist criminal justice, education, and housing systems. Police departments regularly fund studies that find that black people are disproportionately penalized for the same behaviors as whites, but nothing changes.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Eventually agreed that it is probably ok in that context, since an Asian student could also reference in their essay eg. discrimination that they may also have faced growing up.

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That AO doesn't use race calssification.

Anonymous wrote:So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

That was one of the questions asked by (I think) Justice Jackson. There was no direct answer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Nothing in America is colorblind.

Which is the cause of many problems.

The cause of many problems is that most white Americans don’t care that they benefit from systematically racist criminal justice, education, and housing systems. Police departments regularly fund studies that find that black people are disproportionately penalized for the same behaviors as whites, but nothing changes.

So if a kid mentions their race or references it in an essay, what is the "fair admission" guy saying? That AOs can't use the essay?

10 min break?
When do they have lunch?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Not really. It never was.

Not really what?? It should be for like country clubs??

Why not? The SAT is not in the Constitution.

Even country clubs are not allow to discriminate by law LOL

Not true. Country clubs are free to do what they want as long as they are distinctly private in character.

No, Country clubs are not allow to discriminate against race by law.
You don't understand what 'freedom' is.

You can believe what you want. The case law says otherwise.

Link for the case law saying that country clubs can discrinate against race?

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-5th-circuit/1432514.html

"Discrimination can find no rest in a place of public accommodation.   Whether it should be suffered to abide in private clubs is debatable among persons of good will.   But, the Constitution trumps;  those clubs have a right of private association under the First Amendment with which the government may not interfere impermissibly."  

Anonymous wrote:
Service academy lawyer's arguments (officer pipeline) and performance strongest so far, imo.

Did she make any good argument other than 'diversity is important'?

Anonymous wrote:
Service academy lawyer's arguments (officer pipeline) and performance strongest so far, imo.

That would be Elizabeth Prelogar, the SG of the US.

Service academy lawyer's arguments (officer pipeline) and performance strongest so far, imo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My mom didn't go to any college and I didn't go to college in US, my daughter is underprivileged as a first generation applying to American colleges but she has to compete against students whose parents understand this system. She can beat them but being an Asian, she is in a limited quota group so less desirable than underachievers of other quota groups.

It is a fallacy that that there is a quota, and it is a fallacy that the kids who got into whatever school you are talking about are underachievers. They do not force rank admissions based on a single test, nor should they.

If no qouta, why use race in admission?
Who said single test??

Affirmative action is not a quota system. If you didn't bother to find out what AA is, why are you arguing about it?

A judge is exactly asking that right now 'how do you achive diversity without counting numbers'quota''
Lawyer is not making any sense and failed to answer.

Both sides' lawyers are stumbling a little. To be expected. The questions and hypotheticals are challenging; the Court is prepared. Personally I thought J. Thomas's comment that he had heard the same arguments in favor of segregation (re the investment group) to be thought provoking.

I thought the plaintiff advocate was well prepared and did a great job. Counsel for UNC was stiff and READ his opening (not done!). I've also never seen an advocate actually finish their opening (he was reading his) and then wait for questions. Normally the advocate uses every single second they have to argue until the first interruption

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Not really. It never was.

Not really what?? It should be for like country clubs??

Why not? The SAT is not in the Constitution.

Even country clubs are not allow to discriminate by law LOL

Not true. Country clubs are free to do what they want as long as they are distinctly private in character.

No, Country clubs are not allow to discriminate against race by law.
You don't understand what 'freedom' is.

You can believe what you want. The case law says otherwise.

Link for the case law saying that country clubs can discrinate against race?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Not really. It never was.

Not really what?? It should be for like country clubs??

Why not? The SAT is not in the Constitution.

Even country clubs are not allow to discriminate by law LOL

Not true. Country clubs are free to do what they want as long as they are distinctly private in character.

No, Country clubs are not allow to discriminate against race by law.
You don't understand what 'freedom' is.

You can believe what you want. The case law says otherwise.