Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me paste the part of the decision that you nincompoops did not read:
"But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name""
It would be nice if they struck down geography as a factor, but there is no indication that they will
If giving preference to inner cities or poor areas created a racial correlation, that would ge unconstitutional under this ruling
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me paste the part of the decision that you nincompoops did not read:
"But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name""
It would be nice if they struck down geography as a factor, but there is no indication that they will [/quote
They have already ruled decades ago that geography cannot be used as a proxy for race.
and that is why the new admissions policy is on shaky ground. All it takes is a couple of graphs showing how geography was used to bring numbers of just one race down significantly.
Why is it TJ admissions officer's fault that Asians choose to concentrate into a few zip codes? That sounds like it's their choice to live there. It makes perfect sense that TJ would deliberately hold spots available so that it can serve the entire, wide geographical community of applicants that it receives. There is absolutely nothing racial about that.
The admissions office(well the school board) put in the geographic criteria after Asians were congregated in a few zip codes(schools). Imagine that blacks had 100% of the seats, and they all went to one school. Then in an effort to reduce the number of blacks, they announced they would put in a per school quota. This would on its face be race-blind admissions, but the intent was to use geography as a proxy for race and engage in racial discrimination.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They should just give a test that has a generous cut off, and then do a lottery for all those who pass the minimum score on the test. They could even provide training on what the test covers (in school or after school) so that everyone has an opportunity to prepare for it if they want to.
Then let the chips fall where they may. Lotteries can't be race-based.
Or you could buy the test.
Oops.
Anonymous wrote:So, now that the law of the land has changed and SCOTUS clearly said that ANY system that results in a negative admissions impact to a racial group (even if not explicitly) is unconstitutional, and directly stated admissions is a zero sum game and that by definition increasing URM hurt asian applicants, does this open the door for a new TJ lawsuit? I think probably yes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me paste the part of the decision that you nincompoops did not read:
"But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name""
It would be nice if they struck down geography as a factor, but there is no indication that they will [/quote
They have already ruled decades ago that geography cannot be used as a proxy for race.
and that is why the new admissions policy is on shaky ground. All it takes is a couple of graphs showing how geography was used to bring numbers of just one race down significantly.
Why is it TJ admissions officer's fault that Asians choose to concentrate into a few zip codes? That sounds like it's their choice to live there. It makes perfect sense that TJ would deliberately hold spots available so that it can serve the entire, wide geographical community of applicants that it receives. There is absolutely nothing racial about that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me paste the part of the decision that you nincompoops did not read:
"But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name""
It would be nice if they struck down geography as a factor, but there is no indication that they will [/quote
They have already ruled decades ago that geography cannot be used as a proxy for race.
and that is why the new admissions policy is on shaky ground. All it takes is a couple of graphs showing how geography was used to bring numbers of just one race down significantly.
Anonymous wrote:They should just give a test that has a generous cut off, and then do a lottery for all those who pass the minimum score on the test. They could even provide training on what the test covers (in school or after school) so that everyone has an opportunity to prepare for it if they want to.
Then let the chips fall where they may. Lotteries can't be race-based.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me paste the part of the decision that you nincompoops did not read:
"But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name""
It would be nice if they struck down geography as a factor, but there is no indication that they will [/quote
They have already ruled decades ago that geography cannot be used as a proxy for race.
Anonymous wrote:I thought TJ admissions are now race blind. There’s a cap on the number of students from each feeder school though. That’s why the Asians were up in arms, no?
Anonymous wrote:They should just give a test that has a generous cut off, and then do a lottery for all those who pass the minimum score on the test. They could even provide training on what the test covers (in school or after school) so that everyone has an opportunity to prepare for it if they want to.
Then let the chips fall where they may. Lotteries can't be race-based.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me paste the part of the decision that you nincompoops did not read:
"But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name""
It would be nice if they struck down geography as a factor, but there is no indication that they will
Anonymous wrote:So, now that the law of the land has changed and SCOTUS clearly said that ANY system that results in a negative admissions impact to a racial group (even if not explicitly) is unconstitutional, and directly stated admissions is a zero sum game and that by definition increasing URM hurt asian applicants, does this open the door for a new TJ lawsuit? I think probably yes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Let me paste the part of the decision that you nincompoops did not read:
"But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows,” and the prohibition against racial discrimination is “levelled at the thing, not the name""
It would be nice if they struck down geography as a factor, but there is no indication that they will