Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Won't colleges be able to correctly guess race based on name in a very large number of cases?
Sure, but when someone blows the whistle, the settlement would be massive. If they really did it, anyone involved would effectively have lifetime employment because no school could ever risk angering them. There is a reason that most companies aren’t dumb enough to decide to break the law and the implement policies that everyone involved know are illegal
Unless they are stupid you could never prove it. And even if you did there are no damages.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Won't colleges be able to correctly guess race based on name in a very large number of cases?
Sure, but when someone blows the whistle, the settlement would be massive. If they really did it, anyone involved would effectively have lifetime employment because no school could ever risk angering them. There is a reason that most companies aren’t dumb enough to decide to break the law and the implement policies that everyone involved know are illegal
Unless they are stupid you could never prove it. And even if you did there are no damages.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Would the Supreme Court’s decision impact HS class of 2024? Or would it be the following year? Can Universities change admissions drastically of decision comes as late as July 2023?
I’d expect kids waitlisted this year at schools openly engaging in AA to sue, same with last year and the year before right up to the statute of limitations.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm sure you're not one either. The schools had a previous Supreme Court decision saying what they were doing was kosher. I don't see how a lawsuit could work retroactively. (Help me out, numerous biglaw partners on this board).
Most likely (how is that for a lawyer answer) it would not at all be something you could sue on for past wrongs. Even 2023-24 admission year probably is immune from suit.
Anonymous wrote:After Michigan banned affirmative action, Black undergraduate enrollment dropped precipitously — from 7% in 2006 to 4% in 2021.
California banned banned racial preferences in admissions in 1996. By the the fall of 2006, there were just 96 Black freshmen at UCLA, per the New York Times.
Axios
Yep. Things will certainly change. As they did for those schools.
Anonymous wrote:After Michigan banned affirmative action, Black undergraduate enrollment dropped precipitously — from 7% in 2006 to 4% in 2021.
California banned banned racial preferences in admissions in 1996. By the the fall of 2006, there were just 96 Black freshmen at UCLA, per the New York Times.
Axios
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Won't colleges be able to correctly guess race based on name in a very large number of cases?
Sure, but when someone blows the whistle, the settlement would be massive. If they really did it, anyone involved would effectively have lifetime employment because no school could ever risk angering them. There is a reason that most companies aren’t dumb enough to decide to break the law and the implement policies that everyone involved know are illegal
Anonymous wrote:Prediction? Legacy will no longer be a hook. Boost given to students coming from poor families. Admissions based more on merit. IT IS TIME!
Anonymous wrote:Won't colleges be able to correctly guess race based on name in a very large number of cases?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Would the Supreme Court’s decision impact HS class of 2024? Or would it be the following year? Can Universities change admissions drastically of decision comes as late as July 2023?
I’d expect kids waitlisted this year at schools openly engaging in AA to sue, same with last year and the year before right up to the statute of limitations.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm sure you're not one either. The schools had a previous Supreme Court decision saying what they were doing was kosher. I don't see how a lawsuit could work retroactively. (Help me out, numerous biglaw partners on this board).