Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coalition for TJ and FCPS filed motions for summary judgment on Friday. The hearing is scheduled for January 7. Can a real lawyer tell us what is going on (and please not one of you lawyers that think you know constitutional law but clearly do not based on your countless incorrect posts on this Board)?

You are just as capable of reading the motions as anyone else. If they are well written, you will know what is going on

I read them. Coalition for TJ is going to win. Easily.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coalition for TJ and FCPS filed motions for summary judgment on Friday. The hearing is scheduled for January 7. Can a real lawyer tell us what is going on (and please not one of you lawyers that think you know constitutional law but clearly do not based on your countless incorrect posts on this Board)?

You are just as capable of reading the motions as anyone else. If they are well written, you will know what is going on

Anonymous wrote:Coalition for TJ and FCPS filed motions for summary judgment on Friday. The hearing is scheduled for January 7. Can a real lawyer tell us what is going on (and please not one of you lawyers that think you know constitutional law but clearly do not based on your countless incorrect posts on this Board)?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.

More like heroic and standing for a principle.

They're not standing for a principle. They're advocating on behalf of their student (which is fine) but doing so from the platform of serving on a PTSA Executive Committee (which is a lot less fine).

It's not like this is some amicus brief from a disinterested third party or from someone with no dog in the fight.

Well at least it is not hilarious. Sad though that it is all come to this.

DP - I find it amusing that a TJ parent who has had their kids accepted under both the old and the new process thinks it's appropriate to attach their name to a lawsuit claiming that their additional child is "irreparably harmed".

That's the point. It is about the principle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.

More like heroic and standing for a principle.

They're not standing for a principle. They're advocating on behalf of their student (which is fine) but doing so from the platform of serving on a PTSA Executive Committee (which is a lot less fine).

It's not like this is some amicus brief from a disinterested third party or from someone with no dog in the fight.

Well at least it is not hilarious. Sad though that it is all come to this.

DP - I find it amusing that a TJ parent who has had their kids accepted under both the old and the new process thinks it's appropriate to attach their name to a lawsuit claiming that their additional child is "irreparably harmed".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.

More like heroic and standing for a principle.

They're not standing for a principle. They're advocating on behalf of their student (which is fine) but doing so from the platform of serving on a PTSA Executive Committee (which is a lot less fine).

It's not like this is some amicus brief from a disinterested third party or from someone with no dog in the fight.

Well at least it is not hilarious. Sad though that it is all come to this.

DP - I find it amusing that a TJ parent who has had their kids accepted under both the old and the new process thinks it's appropriate to attach their name to a lawsuit claiming that their additional child is "irreparably harmed".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.

More like heroic and standing for a principle.

They're not standing for a principle. They're advocating on behalf of their student (which is fine) but doing so from the platform of serving on a PTSA Executive Committee (which is a lot less fine).

It's not like this is some amicus brief from a disinterested third party or from someone with no dog in the fight.

Well at least it is not hilarious. Sad though that it is all come to this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.

More like heroic and standing for a principle.

They're not standing for a principle. They're advocating on behalf of their student (which is fine) but doing so from the platform of serving on a PTSA Executive Committee (which is a lot less fine).

It's not like this is some amicus brief from a disinterested third party or from someone with no dog in the fight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.

More like heroic and standing for a principle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just caught this gem from the Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (which apparently was denied):

"Coalition members with children who will apply to TJ for the class of 2026 will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction—they will be forced to compete in an admissions environment that makes it more difficult for them to gain admission into TJ because of their race."

This is laughable.

They're in an admissions environment that will make it more difficult to gain admission because of their geographic distribution, not because of their race.

The fact that the South Asian population of Northern Virginia has self-segregated into small pockets in Herndon, Chantilly, Ashburn, and South Riding is no fault of FCPS or of TJ Admissions.

Here's another complete factual inaccuracy from the PLF brief:

" For example, under that plan, two middle schools—Kilmer Middle School and Longfellow Middle School—were grouped into the same regional pathway. These schools are both majority Asian-American, and in 2018 (the last year for which school-level data is publicly available) sent a combined 99 students to TJ."

Longfellow is over 50% white and 20% Asian and Kilmer has a plurality at 45% white and is 24% Asian.

Starting to see why the motion for injunction failed. If your brief contains lies, that's a problem.

Here's another beauty part to all of this:

One of the named complainants in the PLF brief is a current TJ parent. They have multiple students currently at TJ, including students selected under both the old and the new admissions processes, and is complaining on behalf of their future applicant.

They are a member of the new TJ PTSA's Executive Committee that is operating under probationary status due in part to their members' inflammatory and inappropriate statements surrounding the admissions process.

This is simultaneously hilarious and sad.