Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determning the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

But applicants are being discriminated.
that's the p applicants that's the probelm.

Public schools might get baned.
Private colleges and universities at least start paying tax then.

No, they're not. Applicants are not being discriminated against based on their race, color, sex, religion, national origin, veteran status, or sexual orientation just because a big donor's son, who in just about every case is probably every bit as qualified, gets admitted. Now, I would argue that applicants are discriminated against based on mental disability. So if this is where you all want to base your logic on, let's start letting in kids like my brilliant ADHD kid who can't get into Harvard because his grades aren't high enough. He's truly, objectively brilliant and smarter than 99% of the people in the US (this is been shown time and again through testing), but his grades aren't the best because high school is hell for a smart kid with severe ADHD. Why should he be discriminated against based on his documented disability?

You don't mark ADHD on application.
How do you get discriminated.
They ask you you mark your race.

DP. And they give a preference based on race. How are members of protected racial classes being discriminated against?

PP’s point is that using grades as a criteria discriminates against qualified applicants with certain disabilities. They of course ask for grades.

"give a preference based on race" = racial discrimination

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determning the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

But applicants are being discriminated.
that's the p applicants that's the probelm.

Public schools might get baned.
Private colleges and universities at least start paying tax then.

No, they're not. Applicants are not being discriminated against based on their race, color, sex, religion, national origin, veteran status, or sexual orientation just because a big donor's son, who in just about every case is probably every bit as qualified, gets admitted. Now, I would argue that applicants are discriminated against based on mental disability. So if this is where you all want to base your logic on, let's start letting in kids like my brilliant ADHD kid who can't get into Harvard because his grades aren't high enough. He's truly, objectively brilliant and smarter than 99% of the people in the US (this is been shown time and again through testing), but his grades aren't the best because high school is hell for a smart kid with severe ADHD. Why should he be discriminated against based on his documented disability?

You don't mark ADHD on application.
How do you get discriminated.
They ask you you mark your race.

DP. And they give a preference based on race. How are members of protected racial classes being discriminated against?

PP’s point is that using grades as a criteria discriminates against qualified applicants with certain disabilities. They of course ask for grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determining the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

This 100%. None of these lawsuits will matter given all the benefits of test optional.

They can start with stop making you specify your race or legacy status on applications.

the legacy status question would be protected by the first amendment

Anonymous wrote:If my school does away with legacy preference I'm going to stop making donations. In reality I doubt my couple hundred dollar a year donation will do anything for my kids but knowing its a slight minor possibility keeps me sending in my money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determining the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

This 100%. None of these lawsuits will matter given all the benefits of test optional.

They can start with stop making you specify your race or legacy status on applications.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determning the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

But applicants are being discriminated.
that's the p applicants that's the probelm.

Public schools might get baned.
Private colleges and universities at least start paying tax then.

No, they're not. Applicants are not being discriminated against based on their race, color, sex, religion, national origin, veteran status, or sexual orientation just because a big donor's son, who in just about every case is probably every bit as qualified, gets admitted. Now, I would argue that applicants are discriminated against based on mental disability. So if this is where you all want to base your logic on, let's start letting in kids like my brilliant ADHD kid who can't get into Harvard because his grades aren't high enough. He's truly, objectively brilliant and smarter than 99% of the people in the US (this is been shown time and again through testing), but his grades aren't the best because high school is hell for a smart kid with severe ADHD. Why should he be discriminated against based on his documented disability?

You don't mark ADHD on application.
How do you get discriminated.
They ask you you mark your race.

Anonymous wrote:

Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determining the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

This 100%. None of these lawsuits will matter given all the benefits of test optional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determning the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

But applicants are being discriminated.
that's the p applicants that's the probelm.

Public schools might get baned.
Private colleges and universities at least start paying tax then.

No, they're not. Applicants are not being discriminated against based on their race, color, sex, religion, national origin, veteran status, or sexual orientation just because a big donor's son, who in just about every case is probably every bit as qualified, gets admitted. Now, I would argue that applicants are discriminated against based on mental disability. So if this is where you all want to base your logic on, let's start letting in kids like my brilliant ADHD kid who can't get into Harvard because his grades aren't high enough. He's truly, objectively brilliant and smarter than 99% of the people in the US (this is been shown time and again through testing), but his grades aren't the best because high school is hell for a smart kid with severe ADHD. Why should he be discriminated against based on his documented disability?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determning the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

But applicants are being discriminated.
that's the p applicants that's the probelm.

Public schools might get baned.
Private colleges and universities at least start paying tax then.

No, they're not. Applicants are not being discriminated against based on their race, color, sex, religion, national origin, veteran status, or sexual orientation just because a big donor's son, who in just about every case is probably every bit as qualified, gets admitted. Now, I would argue that applicants are discriminated against based on mental disability. So if this is where you all want to base your logic on, let's start letting in kids like my brilliant ADHD kid who can't get into Harvard because his grades aren't high enough. He's truly, objectively brilliant and smarter than 99% of the people in the US (this is been shown time and again through testing), but his grades aren't the best because high school is hell for a smart kid with severe ADHD. Why should he be discriminated against based on his documented disability?

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the proposed legislation. How would it work? My DD was admitted to my alma mater. She had high SATs (1520) and great grades in very rigorous classes at a top private in DC. Her scores and grades are well within the school's standards. How does anyone figure out if she was admitted due to legacy status or her qualifications without regard to legacy status?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determning the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

But applicants are being discriminated.
that's the p applicants that's the probelm.

Public schools might get baned.
Private colleges and universities at least start paying tax then.

Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determining the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither federal nor state governments can ban colleges and universities from determning the criteria they want to build their student community, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes. I can't believe the reach you all want government to have over our everyday lives. It's insane.

But applicants are being discriminated.
that's the p applicants that's the probelm.

Public schools might get baned.
Private colleges and universities at least start paying tax then.