Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

You are clueless. We have Donald Trump as president. He is not going to nominate someone who is to the left or just slightly right to Kennedy. You are a moron. Now quit bragging about your GED.

All of the moderates and swing justices on the Supreme Court during modern times have been nominated by republicans.

None of the justices nominated by liberal presidents have been moderates. They are all very liberal.

The odds of getting a reasonable moderate are most likely with whoever Trump nominates than any justice nominated by a liberal or democratic president.

No, what used to be conservative is no longer conservative. According to current rhetoric, Ronald Reagan would be a centrist moderate.

The democratic nominated justices are are very liberal and farr off from the center.

The moderates are all nominated by republicans.

We are most likely to get a moderate from Trump, than a democratic president.

The moderates are all by republicans, again, has more to go with the country moving farther and farther to the right. Every time there's the movement to the right, another conservative then appears more "moderate" relative to the new nominee. Roberts, once a staunch conservative, will become the voice of the new "moderate" in the coming SCOTUS, pretty much taking the place of departing Kennedy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

You are clueless. We have Donald Trump as president. He is not going to nominate someone who is to the left or just slightly right to Kennedy. You are a moron. Now quit bragging about your GED.

All of the moderates and swing justices on the Supreme Court during modern times have been nominated by republicans.

None of the justices nominated by liberal presidents have been moderates. They are all very liberal.

The odds of getting a reasonable moderate are most likely with whoever Trump nominates than any justice nominated by a liberal or democratic president.

No, what used to be conservative is no longer conservative. According to current rhetoric, Ronald Reagan would be a centrist moderate.

The democratic nominated justices are are very liberal and farr off from the center.

The moderates are all nominated by republicans.

We are most likely to get a moderate from Trump, than a democratic president.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

You are clueless. We have Donald Trump as president. He is not going to nominate someone who is to the left or just slightly right to Kennedy. You are a moron. Now quit bragging about your GED.

All of the moderates and swing justices on the Supreme Court during modern times have been nominated by republicans.

None of the justices nominated by liberal presidents have been moderates. They are all very liberal.

The odds of getting a reasonable moderate are most likely with whoever Trump nominates than any justice nominated by a liberal or democratic president.

No, what used to be conservative is no longer conservative. According to current rhetoric, Ronald Reagan would be a centrist moderate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Awww. Such faith. Touching. Liberals are effed buddy. The court is going to be conservative for an entire generation now. It will be the firewall against the unstoppable demographic and hence balance of power changes that will take place over the next 10 years. We need this. We need both sides to be balanced power wise, because we have idiots on both sides who over reach.

The Dems get: 1 person 1 vote and massive increases in Hispanic and minority votes that will swamp the white population in this country. This is going to happen, no way to stop this now. And they have some crazy idiots who will push for wealth redistribution policies like Universal healthcare, free college,

The republicans get : Citizens United and the supreme court. So they will use the power of money and courts to fight the democratic changes, because they will not have the votes in the next ten years.

Affirmative action is dead now. Unless Clarence Thomas dies and we get a democratic president and senate.

So how will colleges handle this.

They will go to zipcode recruiting. They will target Black and Hispanic zipcodes, Give these students massive holistic preference. Since it is not race based, the only way to combat this will be to claim "Disparate impact" , but the colleges will claim "Diversity" and so it will be a wash. The big losers here will be URM's who are upper middle class. Their days of riding the AA gravy train is going to come to an end. May also end some of the agitation on college campuses, most of this is being spearheaded by privileged URM kids who arrive and campus and start causing trouble.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

You are clueless. We have Donald Trump as president. He is not going to nominate someone who is to the left or just slightly right to Kennedy. You are a moron. Now quit bragging about your GED.

All of the moderates and swing justices on the Supreme Court during modern times have been nominated by republicans.

None of the justices nominated by liberal presidents have been moderates. They are all very liberal.

The odds of getting a reasonable moderate are most likely with whoever Trump nominates than any justice nominated by a liberal or democratic president.

No, what used to be conservative is no longer conservative. According to current rhetoric, Ronald Reagan would be a centrist moderate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

You are clueless. We have Donald Trump as president. He is not going to nominate someone who is to the left or just slightly right to Kennedy. You are a moron. Now quit bragging about your GED.

All of the moderates and swing justices on the Supreme Court during modern times have been nominated by republicans.

None of the justices nominated by liberal presidents have been moderates. They are all very liberal.

The odds of getting a reasonable moderate are most likely with whoever Trump nominates than any justice nominated by a liberal or democratic president.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Awww. Such faith. Touching. Liberals are effed buddy. The court is going to be conservative for an entire generation now. It will be the firewall against the unstoppable demographic and hence balance of power changes that will take place over the next 10 years. We need this. We need both sides to be balanced power wise, because we have idiots on both sides who over reach.

The Dems get: 1 person 1 vote and massive increases in Hispanic and minority votes that will swamp the white population in this country. This is going to happen, no way to stop this now. And they have some crazy idiots who will push for wealth redistribution policies like Universal healthcare, free college,

The republicans get : Citizens United and the supreme court. So they will use the power of money and courts to fight the democratic changes, because they will not have the votes in the next ten years.

Affirmative action is dead now. Unless Clarence Thomas dies and we get a democratic president and senate.

So how will colleges handle this.

They will go to zipcode recruiting. They will target Black and Hispanic zipcodes, Give these students massive holistic preference. Since it is not race based, the only way to combat this will be to claim "Disparate impact" , but the colleges will claim "Diversity" and so it will be a wash. The big losers here will be URM's who are upper middle class. Their days of riding the AA gravy train is going to come to an end. May also end some of the agitation on college campuses, most of this is being spearheaded by privileged URM kids who arrive and campus and start causing trouble.

Agree that the first post is naive wrt the type of Justice Trump would appoint. That said, conservative Justices may take a different attitude toward private universities (e.g. their own or because of a commitment to property rights/freedom of association). Some individuals will also defy expectations. Earl Warren, as AG and later Governor of CA was all for rounding up, relocating, and interning Japanese-Americans. Not the guy you’d have pegged for a leadership role wrt dismantling racial segregation. And it takes a few years for cases to get to the Supreme Court. So it strikes me as premature to declare affirmative action dead. (But not premature to be concerned about its fate and to push for its retention and plan for other ways to achieve racial diversity in elite colleges.)

I don’t think UMC kids from URMs will be screwed. They will include legacies, kids from elite feeder schools, and kids who have a variety of ways (other than SATs) of demonstrating why they’d be great additions to the student bodies of highly selective colleges. This whole gravy train narrative is really obnoxious and completely divorced from reality. I think you’ll also find that there are first gen kids (of all races) who are willing to “cause trouble” in the interests of making elite universities better places by pointing out institutional blindspots and pushing University leaders to live up to their own professed ideals.

Oh Please, spare me the liberal claptrap. All these kids want is identity based totalitarian control of what people can say on campus. They are tyrants who want to slience speech on campus. I have no sympathy for them. Look at "Shrieking girl" at Yale, or the incident at Middlebury or Evergreen state or DePaul or Berkeley. They are thugs and most of them are from privileged families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

Awww. Such faith. Touching. Liberals are effed buddy. The court is going to be conservative for an entire generation now. It will be the firewall against the unstoppable demographic and hence balance of power changes that will take place over the next 10 years. We need this. We need both sides to be balanced power wise, because we have idiots on both sides who over reach.

The Dems get: 1 person 1 vote and massive increases in Hispanic and minority votes that will swamp the white population in this country. This is going to happen, no way to stop this now. And they have some crazy idiots who will push for wealth redistribution policies like Universal healthcare, free college,

The republicans get : Citizens United and the supreme court. So they will use the power of money and courts to fight the democratic changes, because they will not have the votes in the next ten years.

Affirmative action is dead now. Unless Clarence Thomas dies and we get a democratic president and senate.

So how will colleges handle this.

They will go to zipcode recruiting. They will target Black and Hispanic zipcodes, Give these students massive holistic preference. Since it is not race based, the only way to combat this will be to claim "Disparate impact" , but the colleges will claim "Diversity" and so it will be a wash. The big losers here will be URM's who are upper middle class. Their days of riding the AA gravy train is going to come to an end. May also end some of the agitation on college campuses, most of this is being spearheaded by privileged URM kids who arrive and campus and start causing trouble.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:California school systems never went that rout. Even CalTech refused. They simply followed the law.

indeed and did it hurt the UC school's or CalTech's reputation that they let in so many Asians with high test scores? Nope.

So if they get rid of test scores, what academic merit do they look at ... grades? They'd have to also look at what HS you went to because not all A's are are created equal, and I'm guessing that a lot of the students at rigorous HS who get straight As are.... Asian American.

Next, they'll make GPAs optional.

In all seriousness, heavily weighting GPA is promoting cheating.

How so and by whom?

State schools already weight GPA (and/or class rank) heavily. The holistic model is typically used by highly selective private Us that are willing/able to devote serious resources to admissions. FWIW, I don’t think it’s ever (i.e. in either approach) GPA as the HS computes it. There’s a transcript review or rules about which courses count toward GPA for admissions purposes (and which courses matriculants are expected to have taken) and/or a recalculation based on the U’s own standardized point system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:California school systems never went that rout. Even CalTech refused. They simply followed the law.

indeed and did it hurt the UC school's or CalTech's reputation that they let in so many Asians with high test scores? Nope.

So if they get rid of test scores, what academic merit do they look at ... grades? They'd have to also look at what HS you went to because not all A's are are created equal, and I'm guessing that a lot of the students at rigorous HS who get straight As are.... Asian American.

Next, they'll make GPAs optional.

In all seriousness, heavily weighting GPA is promoting cheating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:California school systems never went that rout. Even CalTech refused. They simply followed the law.

indeed and did it hurt the UC school's or CalTech's reputation that they let in so many Asians with high test scores? Nope.

So if they get rid of test scores, what academic merit do they look at ... grades? They'd have to also look at what HS you went to because not all A's are are created equal, and I'm guessing that a lot of the students at rigorous HS who get straight As are.... Asian American.

Next, they'll make GPAs optional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:California school systems never went that rout. Even CalTech refused. They simply followed the law.

indeed and did it hurt the UC school's or CalTech's reputation that they let in so many Asians with high test scores? Nope.

So if they get rid of test scores, what academic merit do they look at ... grades? They'd have to also look at what HS you went to because not all A's are are created equal, and I'm guessing that a lot of the students at rigorous HS who get straight As are.... Asian American.

Next, they'll make GPAs optional.

maybe just sex, race, and a high school diploma?

No, not sex because according to the powers that be you can be any sex you want or no sex at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The retirement of Kennedy, J. will probably have no bearing on affirmative action. This is not a hot button issue for the GOP. Based on the list of his potential replacements, we will get a new Justice who will either be a little to his right or a little to his left. Their views on affirmative action are unknown. But I think it’s not going anywhere. The current approach works quite well.

You are clueless. We have Donald Trump as president. He is not going to nominate someone who is to the left or just slightly right to Kennedy. You are a moron. Now quit bragging about your GED.