Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

No, a common reading of the order suggests that any new process cannot continue to violate federal law as described by the decision.

Without indicating which aspect of the process he found in violation of federal law (which he didn't either in the opinion nor in the order), it is impossible for FCPS to determine what aspect of the process he found to be in violation. It's surprising to me how open he left the door, but perhaps it shouldn't be given his less-than-stellar record.

I wonder if the School Board will request an expedited process from the Fourth Circuit in the event that the stay is lifted.

These are good questions. I also read the initial stop order as essentially, "you have to do something else" with very little guidance as to what in the process was acceptable and what was not. Was it the 1.5% allocation? Was it the ELL experience factor? How about the ED experience factor? Or was it the lack of an exam? All Hilton basically said was "Boo, this is racist, fix it" without any specifics.

In the absence of that guidance, it seems to me that FCPS would be free to do more or less whatever they want as long as it's not identical in all steps to the process that was enjoined. It's shocking to me that Hilton wasn't more specific.

You don't understand what a Judge does.

Juges make laws and establish administrative procedure. Obviously.

I know you're being sarcastic, but they actually do in these kinds of cases. Kansas City was basically run by a federal judge for years including levying taxes on the school district to fund court mandated salary increases for teachers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

No, a common reading of the order suggests that any new process cannot continue to violate federal law as described by the decision.

Without indicating which aspect of the process he found in violation of federal law (which he didn't either in the opinion nor in the order), it is impossible for FCPS to determine what aspect of the process he found to be in violation. It's surprising to me how open he left the door, but perhaps it shouldn't be given his less-than-stellar record.

I wonder if the School Board will request an expedited process from the Fourth Circuit in the event that the stay is lifted.

These are good questions. I also read the initial stop order as essentially, "you have to do something else" with very little guidance as to what in the process was acceptable and what was not. Was it the 1.5% allocation? Was it the ELL experience factor? How about the ED experience factor? Or was it the lack of an exam? All Hilton basically said was "Boo, this is racist, fix it" without any specifics.

In the absence of that guidance, it seems to me that FCPS would be free to do more or less whatever they want as long as it's not identical in all steps to the process that was enjoined. It's shocking to me that Hilton wasn't more specific.

You don't understand what a Judge does.

Juges make laws and establish administrative procedure. Obviously.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

No, a common reading of the order suggests that any new process cannot continue to violate federal law as described by the decision.

Without indicating which aspect of the process he found in violation of federal law (which he didn't either in the opinion nor in the order), it is impossible for FCPS to determine what aspect of the process he found to be in violation. It's surprising to me how open he left the door, but perhaps it shouldn't be given his less-than-stellar record.

I wonder if the School Board will request an expedited process from the Fourth Circuit in the event that the stay is lifted.

These are good questions. I also read the initial stop order as essentially, "you have to do something else" with very little guidance as to what in the process was acceptable and what was not. Was it the 1.5% allocation? Was it the ELL experience factor? How about the ED experience factor? Or was it the lack of an exam? All Hilton basically said was "Boo, this is racist, fix it" without any specifics.

In the absence of that guidance, it seems to me that FCPS would be free to do more or less whatever they want as long as it's not identical in all steps to the process that was enjoined. It's shocking to me that Hilton wasn't more specific.

You don't understand what a Judge does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vox has a decent story on this

https://www.vox.com/2022/4/14/23022265/supreme-court-affirmative-action-coalition-tj-fairfax-school-george-bush-race

they wholly expect a 6-3 win for the coalition for TJ

This is an outstanding story that highlight just how far outside the judicial mainstream the Hilton ruling was without mentioning him by name.

It's worth noting that the article does not make a prediction as to the eventual result - it merely posits that a ruling that goes against the entire landscape of Supreme Court precedent is more possible than it's ever been.

It is an outstanding story for sure.

Except it talks about how jurisprudence has evolved with the times.

"Mainstream" is a loaded issue. LGBT rights were way out of the "mainstream" at one time but they are very much part of mainstream today. What was mainstream 20 years ago is not necessarily mainstream today. And the article says that the current court may be ready to redefine obsolete jurisprudence accounting for new reality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vox has a decent story on this

https://www.vox.com/2022/4/14/23022265/supreme-court-affirmative-action-coalition-tj-fairfax-school-george-bush-race

they wholly expect a 6-3 win for the coalition for TJ

This is an outstanding story that highlight just how far outside the judicial mainstream the Hilton ruling was without mentioning him by name.

It's worth noting that the article does not make a prediction as to the eventual result - it merely posits that a ruling that goes against the entire landscape of Supreme Court precedent is more possible than it's ever been.

Anonymous wrote:Vox has a decent story on this

https://www.vox.com/2022/4/14/23022265/supreme-court-affirmative-action-coalition-tj-fairfax-school-george-bush-race

they wholly expect a 6-3 win for the coalition for TJ

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

No, a common reading of the order suggests that any new process cannot continue to violate federal law as described by the decision.

Without indicating which aspect of the process he found in violation of federal law (which he didn't either in the opinion nor in the order), it is impossible for FCPS to determine what aspect of the process he found to be in violation. It's surprising to me how open he left the door, but perhaps it shouldn't be given his less-than-stellar record.

I wonder if the School Board will request an expedited process from the Fourth Circuit in the event that the stay is lifted.

These are good questions. I also read the initial stop order as essentially, "you have to do something else" with very little guidance as to what in the process was acceptable and what was not. Was it the 1.5% allocation? Was it the ELL experience factor? How about the ED experience factor? Or was it the lack of an exam? All Hilton basically said was "Boo, this is racist, fix it" without any specifics.

In the absence of that guidance, it seems to me that FCPS would be free to do more or less whatever they want as long as it's not identical in all steps to the process that was enjoined. It's shocking to me that Hilton wasn't more specific.

You don't understand what a Judge does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

No, a common reading of the order suggests that any new process cannot continue to violate federal law as described by the decision.

Without indicating which aspect of the process he found in violation of federal law (which he didn't either in the opinion nor in the order), it is impossible for FCPS to determine what aspect of the process he found to be in violation. It's surprising to me how open he left the door, but perhaps it shouldn't be given his less-than-stellar record.

I wonder if the School Board will request an expedited process from the Fourth Circuit in the event that the stay is lifted.

These are good questions. I also read the initial stop order as essentially, "you have to do something else" with very little guidance as to what in the process was acceptable and what was not. Was it the 1.5% allocation? Was it the ELL experience factor? How about the ED experience factor? Or was it the lack of an exam? All Hilton basically said was "Boo, this is racist, fix it" without any specifics.

In the absence of that guidance, it seems to me that FCPS would be free to do more or less whatever they want as long as it's not identical in all steps to the process that was enjoined. It's shocking to me that Hilton wasn't more specific.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

No, a common reading of the order suggests that any new process cannot continue to violate federal law as described by the decision.

Without indicating which aspect of the process he found in violation of federal law (which he didn't either in the opinion nor in the order), it is impossible for FCPS to determine what aspect of the process he found to be in violation. It's surprising to me how open he left the door, but perhaps it shouldn't be given his less-than-stellar record.

I wonder if the School Board will request an expedited process from the Fourth Circuit in the event that the stay is lifted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone knows FCPS response to Roberts' request that was due on Wednesday?

Link shared on page 34. As expected, the argument runs along the line of showing the applicant-vs-offered ratio, completely ignoring the fact that the new policy disqualifies previously eligible Asians from applying in the first place.

Who precisely is disqualified from even applying as a result of the new admissions process? That's a new take.

The previously qualified Asians are not eligible to apply for one of the allocated seats because the allocation rule blocks them from applying.

That's completely false. The allocation rule doesn't block anyone at all from applying. What makes you think that it does? The only thing that the allocation rule does is it makes students from previous "feeder" schools - which are still very much "feeder" schools, by the way - slightly less likely to gain admission than they were previously. But in no way are they enjoined from being a part of the application process.

Asian students from other non-feeder schools now have a significantly higher chance to get in than they did previously, and only two of the schools impacted - Carson and Rocky Run - are plurality (not even majority) Asian.

The new process vastly improved access to TJ for thousands of Asian students across FCPS.

Previously, the entire number of seats was open to all eligible applicants. The board removed the majority of seats from previously eligible Asian applicants. By your rationale, the board could have given 549 seats to everyone else, leaving only 1 seat for Asian applicants and that would have been okay because those Asians were not "enjoyed from being a part of the application process".

Is it your contention that only Asian students apply for and are eligible for the spaces at the traditional feeder schools? That doesn't hold up either.

There are thousands more Asian students in FCPS attending non-feeder schools than there are attending feeder schools.

If your question is about raw access to spaces, then every student in FCPS was impacted equally by the new rule because every one of them now was only able to compete for the allocated spaces within their school and whatever was left in the unallocated pool.

That point was not made by the lawyers at PLF because even they knew that it would be specious.

That's not my contention at all. I was merely pointing out the fact that the majority of available seats became unavailable to previously qualified candidates, which has naturally higher representation among Asians. You are again falling into the trap of trying to explain why the allocation process is okay. Absent racist intent, I would agree with you that it may be a fine method to select students to attend TJ. However, the board chose this method based on their racist intent, knowing that this process will reduce the number of Asian applications by preventing them from being eligible to compete for allocated spaces. PLF did not make this point because it is covered in the disprate impact analysis they advanced, showing a reduced number of Asians admitted as a portion of the incoming class. The same data pattern shows in the application numbers, showing a reduction of Asians as a percentage of total applications.

You're again falling back on a simple before-and-after comparison to make your case. It doesn't hold up.

It's only "simple" because you disagree with it. Every DI assessment uses a before-and-after comparison.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

No, a common reading of the order suggests that any new process cannot continue to violate federal law as described by the decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a genuine legal question and I would ask only those who actually know the answer to reply:

Can a public school change its admissions process after its applications are submitted? It seems reasonable that FCPS would have to start all over again beginning with the application process for 2026 if they are enjoined from using the process that the initial applicants signed up for.

That seems to be up to local policy, which cannot violate federal protections of fundamental rights. So, regardless of what FCPS/VA rules on this matter is, if federal courts do not allow the current admission process and order a new process to be implemented, then this will have to be done.

Hilton's order only mandated that the new process could not be used. A commonsense reading of that order suggests that any change to the process (however minor) would constitute a new process. If Hilton wanted to write a more exacting set of specifications, he had every ability to do so - but given his lack of judicial bona fides, it's unsurprising that he didn't. This is a guy who has been stuck at District Court for 40 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone knows FCPS response to Roberts' request that was due on Wednesday?

Link shared on page 34. As expected, the argument runs along the line of showing the applicant-vs-offered ratio, completely ignoring the fact that the new policy disqualifies previously eligible Asians from applying in the first place.

Who precisely is disqualified from even applying as a result of the new admissions process? That's a new take.

The previously qualified Asians are not eligible to apply for one of the allocated seats because the allocation rule blocks them from applying.

That's completely false. The allocation rule doesn't block anyone at all from applying. What makes you think that it does? The only thing that the allocation rule does is it makes students from previous "feeder" schools - which are still very much "feeder" schools, by the way - slightly less likely to gain admission than they were previously. But in no way are they enjoined from being a part of the application process.

Asian students from other non-feeder schools now have a significantly higher chance to get in than they did previously, and only two of the schools impacted - Carson and Rocky Run - are plurality (not even majority) Asian.

The new process vastly improved access to TJ for thousands of Asian students across FCPS.

Previously, the entire number of seats was open to all eligible applicants. The board removed the majority of seats from previously eligible Asian applicants. By your rationale, the board could have given 549 seats to everyone else, leaving only 1 seat for Asian applicants and that would have been okay because those Asians were not "enjoyed from being a part of the application process".

Is it your contention that only Asian students apply for and are eligible for the spaces at the traditional feeder schools? That doesn't hold up either.

There are thousands more Asian students in FCPS attending non-feeder schools than there are attending feeder schools.

If your question is about raw access to spaces, then every student in FCPS was impacted equally by the new rule because every one of them now was only able to compete for the allocated spaces within their school and whatever was left in the unallocated pool.

That point was not made by the lawyers at PLF because even they knew that it would be specious.

That's not my contention at all. I was merely pointing out the fact that the majority of available seats became unavailable to previously qualified candidates, which has naturally higher representation among Asians. You are again falling into the trap of trying to explain why the allocation process is okay. Absent racist intent, I would agree with you that it may be a fine method to select students to attend TJ. However, the board chose this method based on their racist intent, knowing that this process will reduce the number of Asian applications by preventing them from being eligible to compete for allocated spaces. PLF did not make this point because it is covered in the disprate impact analysis they advanced, showing a reduced number of Asians admitted as a portion of the incoming class. The same data pattern shows in the application numbers, showing a reduction of Asians as a percentage of total applications.

You're again falling back on a simple before-and-after comparison to make your case. It doesn't hold up.

Anonymous wrote:When is the hearing? When will we know?