Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Four things:

1. Where is the data for this year? My kid (white) went to TJ. Math is sequenced by semester, not by year. What is the math placement for this class vs prior classes? How many are Math 1, 2 or 2.5 vs 3+? And how did the grade distribution compare to prior years? That data exists. How many kids are on academic probation for being below 3.5 vs past years? How many kids have dropped back to base school vs prior years? English and Stats grade distributions should also be shared. That’s how you know if TJ is getting kids who can manage the work. Not rocket science.

2. This is disparate impact because Omeish and other SB members said they were using geography, SES and other soft factors as a proxy for race. You can get to DI without someone saying “the goal is to be racist”. But Omeish texted the quiet part out loud. P She really made this a disparate treatment case.

What a moron.

Also, if aren’t a lawyer, please stop talking about DI. It’s complicated and you are doing it wrong.

3. The existence of this litigation is not a shock. If the SB and TJ Admissions don’t have a Plan B in case they cannot use the current system, that is inexcusable negligence. It should not suddenly dawn on them on 4/20 that they have a problem and need a new system. They should have had a contingency for months.

Now, they’re incompetent, so they don’t. But, they should.

4. The stay will remain in place. FCPS should try again and this time STOP TEXTING. They won’t. And they will lose. I think there is a good chance that the full case is ultimately heard by SCOTUS.

I'm a lawyer but not a con law lawyer and I find all of this confusing. There does seem to be a genuine issue whether strict scrutiny will be/should be applied here. FWIW

No, a school cannot really run two simultaneous admissions processes, as the district court advised FCPS and as FCPS failed to do. That's just impossible. And they cannot run the old admissions process, as some seem to be advocating, because the tests are unavailable (the test results are likewise unavailable-- I suppose advocates think that all 2500 applicants should simply show up this Saturday at a building and take the (unavailable) old tests in order to somehow go forward with the old admissions process).

The stay is what Roberts is currently considering -- in another 5 years or so, I doubt this case will get to the Supreme Court again. The climate will have changed by then (I meant the educational and political climate but I guess also the planet's climate, too).

Agreed. People who believe that somehow another admissions process should be designed and implemented have no idea how admissions processes work, especially for large schools or for public schools. Judge Hilton was the first to make this insane assertion but he certainly won't be the last.

They could absolutely use grades and portions of the student profile sheets and to make the selections and pull out geographic preference (which hurts Asian kids in AAP centers) and experience factors from the score. They knew in the fall there could be an issue, so they could have administered a test, gotten recommendations or gathered other objective data. But yeah— it’s too late now. It’s the knowing a problem exists then ignoring it, then saying, we don’t have time to i it that’s crazy making.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Four things:

1. Where is the data for this year? My kid (white) went to TJ. Math is sequenced by semester, not by year. What is the math placement for this class vs prior classes? How many are Math 1, 2 or 2.5 vs 3+? And how did the grade distribution compare to prior years? That data exists. How many kids are on academic probation for being below 3.5 vs past years? How many kids have dropped back to base school vs prior years? English and Stats grade distributions should also be shared. That’s how you know if TJ is getting kids who can manage the work. Not rocket science.

2. This is disparate impact because Omeish and other SB members said they were using geography, SES and other soft factors as a proxy for race. You can get to DI without someone saying “the goal is to be racist”. But Omeish texted the quiet part out loud. P She really made this a disparate treatment case.

What a moron.

Also, if aren’t a lawyer, please stop talking about DI. It’s complicated and you are doing it wrong.

3. The existence of this litigation is not a shock. If the SB and TJ Admissions don’t have a Plan B in case they cannot use the current system, that is inexcusable negligence. It should not suddenly dawn on them on 4/20 that they have a problem and need a new system. They should have had a contingency for months.

Now, they’re incompetent, so they don’t. But, they should.

4. The stay will remain in place. FCPS should try again and this time STOP TEXTING. They won’t. And they will lose. I think there is a good chance that the full case is ultimately heard by SCOTUS.

I'm a lawyer but not a con law lawyer and I find all of this confusing. There does seem to be a genuine issue whether strict scrutiny will be/should be applied here. FWIW

No, a school cannot really run two simultaneous admissions processes, as the district court advised FCPS and as FCPS failed to do. That's just impossible. And they cannot run the old admissions process, as some seem to be advocating, because the tests are unavailable (the test results are likewise unavailable-- I suppose advocates think that all 2500 applicants should simply show up this Saturday at a building and take the (unavailable) old tests in order to somehow go forward with the old admissions process).

The stay is what Roberts is currently considering -- in another 5 years or so, I doubt this case will get to the Supreme Court again. The climate will have changed by then (I meant the educational and political climate but I guess also the planet's climate, too).

Agreed. People who believe that somehow another admissions process should be designed and implemented have no idea how admissions processes work, especially for large schools or for public schools. Judge Hilton was the first to make this insane assertion but he certainly won't be the last.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this not portend that, one way or the other, the racially motivated change in the TJ admission policy is eventually going to be invalidated by the Supreme Court? It’s a conservative court and, while Roberts sometimes sides with the liberals, the fact that he got the matter on the “shadow docket” seems to suggest he has some sympathy for the plaintiffs.

The fact that he got the stay application is just a reflection that he is assigned to applications from the 4th circuit.

The fact that he asked for a response is an indication that someone on the court is taking the application seriously but doesn’t necessarily indicate which way they will break on the stay.

However, most of these (99%?) emergency applications are rejected summarily so the fact that this case (vacating stay) is going to be reviewed is a sign.

The partisan hacks the GOP has appointed to the court love this kind of thing.

Oh, yes, do tell us the liberals don’t do that! See “I can’t define a woman”.

Neither could Conservatives asked the same question. See also, Josh Hawley (“someone with a Uterus.” When asked what about people (like me) with a medically necessary hysterectomy, he said he didn’t know if we were women. Facepalm). Or Madison Crawthorn “no tallywhacker”— which isn’t the right euphemism and refers to a type of fish. And says a guy who got his junk blown off in Vietnam isn’t a man). Or the gift that keeps on giving. MTG “made of Adams rib (how do you test for that?), her husbands wife, the weaker sex”. Which mean she thinks she’s weaker than Schumer and Biden. So…. I’m no a biologist indeed looks good compared to what GOOPERS said.

For me it's XX for 99.9% of people. And we can discuss mixed sex people with a biologist. I am really annoyed about Jackson's response.

But you are fine with MTG, Crawthorn and Hawley? Because I not the weaker sex. And I’m still a woman despite having had a hysterectomy. So, I’m not.

I didn’t say I was fine with them either but honestly if forced to pick I think theirs is better than “unknowable for a layman.”

So as a layman, tell me— how do I test to see if I came from Adams rib? That seems unknowable to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:demographic 2024 2025 %change
asian 73% 54% -26%
white 18% 22% +26%
hispanic 3% 11% +242%
black 2% 7% +245%
other 4% 5% +26%

What a play on numbers!! LMAO!

So if hypothetically, the entire TJ freshman class had:

1 black student last year only

4 black students this year only

300% increase!!!

A more honest look would be at the underlying numbers. Not % increase only

Someone else did this already. It confirmed that the numbers for Hispanic students increased by a larger raw number than white students did.

Here's another way to look at the data that controls somewhat for variance in application numbers: Which group saw the biggest increase in success rate - that is, percentage of applied students offered admission?

In 2024:

White - 86 admitted/595 applied = 14.4% admit rate
Black - TS admitted/160 applied = .... tough to say. Let's be as charitable as possible and say that 9 were admitted because that's the largest number possible. 9/160 = 5.6% admit rate
Hispanic - 16/208 = 7.7% admit rate

In 2025:

White - 123/726 = 16.9% admit rate (delta: 2.5%)
Black - 39/272 = 14.3% admit rate (delta: 8.7% at minimum but likely much higher)
Hispanic - 62/295 = 21.0% admit rate (delta: 13.3%)

By this metric, which is a perfectly logical way of looking at the data, white students benefited the LEAST among all of the underrepresented groups from the admissions changes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:demographic 2024 2025 %change
asian 73% 54% -26%
white 18% 22% +26%
hispanic 3% 11% +242%
black 2% 7% +245%
other 4% 5% +26%

What a play on numbers!! LMAO!

So if hypothetically, the entire TJ freshman class had:

1 black student last year only

4 black students this year only

300% increase!!!

A more honest look would be at the underlying numbers. Not % increase only

Anonymous wrote:Four things:

1. Where is the data for this year? My kid (white) went to TJ. Math is sequenced by semester, not by year. What is the math placement for this class vs prior classes? How many are Math 1, 2 or 2.5 vs 3+? And how did the grade distribution compare to prior years? That data exists. How many kids are on academic probation for being below 3.5 vs past years? How many kids have dropped back to base school vs prior years? English and Stats grade distributions should also be shared. That’s how you know if TJ is getting kids who can manage the work. Not rocket science.

2. This is disparate impact because Omeish and other SB members said they were using geography, SES and other soft factors as a proxy for race. You can get to DI without someone saying “the goal is to be racist”. But Omeish texted the quiet part out loud. P She really made this a disparate treatment case.

What a moron.

Also, if aren’t a lawyer, please stop talking about DI. It’s complicated and you are doing it wrong.

3. The existence of this litigation is not a shock. If the SB and TJ Admissions don’t have a Plan B in case they cannot use the current system, that is inexcusable negligence. It should not suddenly dawn on them on 4/20 that they have a problem and need a new system. They should have had a contingency for months.

Now, they’re incompetent, so they don’t. But, they should.

4. The stay will remain in place. FCPS should try again and this time STOP TEXTING. They won’t. And they will lose. I think there is a good chance that the full case is ultimately heard by SCOTUS.

Anonymous wrote:demographic 2024 2025 %change
asian 73% 54% -26%
white 18% 22% +26%
hispanic 3% 11% +242%
black 2% 7% +245%
other 4% 5% +26%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Four things:

1. Where is the data for this year? My kid (white) went to TJ. Math is sequenced by semester, not by year. What is the math placement for this class vs prior classes? How many are Math 1, 2 or 2.5 vs 3+? And how did the grade distribution compare to prior years? That data exists. How many kids are on academic probation for being below 3.5 vs past years? How many kids have dropped back to base school vs prior years? English and Stats grade distributions should also be shared. That’s how you know if TJ is getting kids who can manage the work. Not rocket science.

2. This is disparate impact because Omeish and other SB members said they were using geography, SES and other soft factors as a proxy for race. You can get to DI without someone saying “the goal is to be racist”. But Omeish texted the quiet part out loud. P She really made this a disparate treatment case.

What a moron.

Also, if aren’t a lawyer, please stop talking about DI. It’s complicated and you are doing it wrong.

3. The existence of this litigation is not a shock. If the SB and TJ Admissions don’t have a Plan B in case they cannot use the current system, that is inexcusable negligence. It should not suddenly dawn on them on 4/20 that they have a problem and need a new system. They should have had a contingency for months.

Now, they’re incompetent, so they don’t. But, they should.

4. The stay will remain in place. FCPS should try again and this time STOP TEXTING. They won’t. And they will lose. I think there is a good chance that the full case is ultimately heard by SCOTUS.

I'm a lawyer but not a con law lawyer and I find all of this confusing. There does seem to be a genuine issue whether strict scrutiny will be/should be applied here. FWIW

No, a school cannot really run two simultaneous admissions processes, as the district court advised FCPS and as FCPS failed to do. That's just impossible. And they cannot run the old admissions process, as some seem to be advocating, because the tests are unavailable (the test results are likewise unavailable-- I suppose advocates think that all 2500 applicants should simply show up this Saturday at a building and take the (unavailable) old tests in order to somehow go forward with the old admissions process).

The stay is what Roberts is currently considering -- in another 5 years or so, I doubt this case will get to the Supreme Court again. The climate will have changed by then (I meant the educational and political climate but I guess also the planet's climate, too).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these legal battles the best use of fcps tax dollars? Maybe if they spent more money on other aap programs people wouldn’t need to clamor so hard to get into the scarce resource that’s TJ

Just get rid of all race on apps

TJ doesn’t have race on the app.

Disparate impact is a recognized legal theory.

Interesting. So if certain races have much lower acceptance rates & enrollment #s than others is that a disparate impact?

It basically means something that is race neutral can still be found to be discriminatory if it results in having a disparate impact on a protected class. Something that is race neutral can be a proxy for doing something racist if it has the result of being discriminatory against certain races. It depends on the facts and who and how it impacts.

Right. So the current admissions process has a disparate impact on admissions for URMs — significantly lower rates of admission.

Is that what the facts show? What if you look at % of applicants of each race who applied that are accepted?

Yes. We already did that analysis on another thread.

Ok thanks. Why do we only care about URMs? There are poor Asians. And we didn’t have Hispanic people as slaves so it’s not reparations for them to be URMs. Sorry if that was already discussed.

Friendly reminder that poor Asians were the biggest beneficiaries of the new admissions process per the data that was recently released - far moreso than Black or Hispanic students...

Nope white students were the biggest beneficiaries by the numbers. Can’t speak to their SES.

That's completely false and has no basis in the data.

It's what was submitted to the SC. I think there is the data on it.

There is no way to put that data together to suggest that white families were the biggest beneficiaries. Absolutely none.

Look t absolute numbers, not percents. 26% of 100 > 242% of TS

Anonymous wrote:Four things:

1. Where is the data for this year? My kid (white) went to TJ. Math is sequenced by semester, not by year. What is the math placement for this class vs prior classes? How many are Math 1, 2 or 2.5 vs 3+? And how did the grade distribution compare to prior years? That data exists. How many kids are on academic probation for being below 3.5 vs past years? How many kids have dropped back to base school vs prior years? English and Stats grade distributions should also be shared. That’s how you know if TJ is getting kids who can manage the work. Not rocket science.

2. This is disparate impact because Omeish and other SB members said they were using geography, SES and other soft factors as a proxy for race. You can get to DI without someone saying “the goal is to be racist”. But Omeish texted the quiet part out loud. P She really made this a disparate treatment case.

What a moron.

Also, if aren’t a lawyer, please stop talking about DI. It’s complicated and you are doing it wrong.

3. The existence of this litigation is not a shock. If the SB and TJ Admissions don’t have a Plan B in case they cannot use the current system, that is inexcusable negligence. It should not suddenly dawn on them on 4/20 that they have a problem and need a new system. They should have had a contingency for months.

Now, they’re incompetent, so they don’t. But, they should.

4. The stay will remain in place. FCPS should try again and this time STOP TEXTING. They won’t. And they will lose. I think there is a good chance that the full case is ultimately heard by SCOTUS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this not portend that, one way or the other, the racially motivated change in the TJ admission policy is eventually going to be invalidated by the Supreme Court? It’s a conservative court and, while Roberts sometimes sides with the liberals, the fact that he got the matter on the “shadow docket” seems to suggest he has some sympathy for the plaintiffs.

The fact that he got the stay application is just a reflection that he is assigned to applications from the 4th circuit.

The fact that he asked for a response is an indication that someone on the court is taking the application seriously but doesn’t necessarily indicate which way they will break on the stay.

However, most of these (99%?) emergency applications are rejected summarily so the fact that this case (vacating stay) is going to be reviewed is a sign.

The partisan hacks the GOP has appointed to the court love this kind of thing.

Oh, yes, do tell us the liberals don’t do that! See “I can’t define a woman”.

Neither could Conservatives asked the same question. See also, Josh Hawley (“someone with a Uterus.” When asked what about people (like me) with a medically necessary hysterectomy, he said he didn’t know if we were women. Facepalm). Or Madison Crawthorn “no tallywhacker”— which isn’t the right euphemism and refers to a type of fish. And says a guy who got his junk blown off in Vietnam isn’t a man). Or the gift that keeps on giving. MTG “made of Adams rib (how do you test for that?), her husbands wife, the weaker sex”. Which mean she thinks she’s weaker than Schumer and Biden. So…. I’m no a biologist indeed looks good compared to what GOOPERS said.

For me it's XX for 99.9% of people. And we can discuss mixed sex people with a biologist. I am really annoyed about Jackson's response.

But you are fine with MTG, Crawthorn and Hawley? Because I not the weaker sex. And I’m still a woman despite having had a hysterectomy. So, I’m not.

I didn’t say I was fine with them either but honestly if forced to pick I think theirs is better than “unknowable for a layman.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these legal battles the best use of fcps tax dollars? Maybe if they spent more money on other aap programs people wouldn’t need to clamor so hard to get into the scarce resource that’s TJ

Just get rid of all race on apps

TJ doesn’t have race on the app.

Disparate impact is a recognized legal theory.

Interesting. So if certain races have much lower acceptance rates & enrollment #s than others is that a disparate impact?

It basically means something that is race neutral can still be found to be discriminatory if it results in having a disparate impact on a protected class. Something that is race neutral can be a proxy for doing something racist if it has the result of being discriminatory against certain races. It depends on the facts and who and how it impacts.

Right. So the current admissions process has a disparate impact on admissions for URMs — significantly lower rates of admission.

Is that what the facts show? What if you look at % of applicants of each race who applied that are accepted?

Yes. We already did that analysis on another thread.

Ok thanks. Why do we only care about URMs? There are poor Asians. And we didn’t have Hispanic people as slaves so it’s not reparations for them to be URMs. Sorry if that was already discussed.

Friendly reminder that poor Asians were the biggest beneficiaries of the new admissions process per the data that was recently released - far moreso than Black or Hispanic students...

Nope white students were the biggest beneficiaries by the numbers. Can’t speak to their SES.

That's completely false and has no basis in the data.

It's what was submitted to the SC. I think there is the data on it.

There is no way to put that data together to suggest that white families were the biggest beneficiaries. Absolutely none.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this not portend that, one way or the other, the racially motivated change in the TJ admission policy is eventually going to be invalidated by the Supreme Court? It’s a conservative court and, while Roberts sometimes sides with the liberals, the fact that he got the matter on the “shadow docket” seems to suggest he has some sympathy for the plaintiffs.

The fact that he got the stay application is just a reflection that he is assigned to applications from the 4th circuit.

The fact that he asked for a response is an indication that someone on the court is taking the application seriously but doesn’t necessarily indicate which way they will break on the stay.

However, most of these (99%?) emergency applications are rejected summarily so the fact that this case (vacating stay) is going to be reviewed is a sign.

The partisan hacks the GOP has appointed to the court love this kind of thing.

Oh, yes, do tell us the liberals don’t do that! See “I can’t define a woman”.

Neither could Conservatives asked the same question. See also, Josh Hawley (“someone with a Uterus.” When asked what about people (like me) with a medically necessary hysterectomy, he said he didn’t know if we were women. Facepalm). Or Madison Crawthorn “no tallywhacker”— which isn’t the right euphemism and refers to a type of fish. And says a guy who got his junk blown off in Vietnam isn’t a man). Or the gift that keeps on giving. MTG “made of Adams rib (how do you test for that?), her husbands wife, the weaker sex”. Which mean she thinks she’s weaker than Schumer and Biden. So…. I’m no a biologist indeed looks good compared to what GOOPERS said.

For me it's XX for 99.9% of people. And we can discuss mixed sex people with a biologist. I am really annoyed about Jackson's response.

But you are fine with MTG, Crawthorn and Hawley? Because I not the weaker sex. And I’m still a woman despite having had a hysterectomy. So, I’m not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this not portend that, one way or the other, the racially motivated change in the TJ admission policy is eventually going to be invalidated by the Supreme Court? It’s a conservative court and, while Roberts sometimes sides with the liberals, the fact that he got the matter on the “shadow docket” seems to suggest he has some sympathy for the plaintiffs.

The fact that he got the stay application is just a reflection that he is assigned to applications from the 4th circuit.

The fact that he asked for a response is an indication that someone on the court is taking the application seriously but doesn’t necessarily indicate which way they will break on the stay.

However, most of these (99%?) emergency applications are rejected summarily so the fact that this case (vacating stay) is going to be reviewed is a sign.

The partisan hacks the GOP has appointed to the court love this kind of thing.

Oh, yes, do tell us the liberals don’t do that! See “I can’t define a woman”.

Neither could Conservatives asked the same question. See also, Josh Hawley (“someone with a Uterus.” When asked what about people (like me) with a medically necessary hysterectomy, he said he didn’t know if we were women. Facepalm). Or Madison Crawthorn “no tallywhacker”— which isn’t the right euphemism and refers to a type of fish. And says a guy who got his junk blown off in Vietnam isn’t a man). Or the gift that keeps on giving. MTG “made of Adams rib (how do you test for that?), her husbands wife, the weaker sex”. Which mean she thinks she’s weaker than Schumer and Biden. So…. I’m no a biologist indeed looks good compared to what GOOPERS said.

For me it's XX for 99.9% of people. And we can discuss mixed sex people with a biologist. I am really annoyed about Jackson's response.