Supreme Court rejects affirmative action at colleges, says schools can’t consider race in admission

Pretty much everyone who applies to Harvard meets their qualifications (whos paying the application fees if they dont), so I mean basically everyone could say they didn't get in for some arbitrary reason. You dont know if they are wrong or right. Could be that you had a bumper crop of fail-kid legacies, or the crew team needed some rowers. Setting aside spots on a racial basis has been illegal since 1978, so its certainly not true in any formal quantifiable sense. Personally, the most fair thing would be to have a lottery or to admit everyone who is qualified, but that isn't happening for pretty obvious reasons.

 

I honestly don't know, nor do I have a problem with demographic disparities like that.

If you're not looking at race, it's completely normal for the demographics to end up messy. It's when you're looking at race and looking for race from an admissions perspective that creates problems for me.

 

I suppose it depends on how you frame your baseline; however, a large number of failed applicants would have very likely been admitted had they been black or hispanic.

For instance, from 2000-2017, the average Asian applicant had a higher SAT score than the average black/hispanic admittee.


The reasons for doing this are fairly debatable, but I think it's a mistake to minimize the effect of these programs--race conscious admissions really does have a material impact on your chances of admission. It's not just acting as a tie breaker.

 

Basically what you and others are saying is that it was okay to shamefully discriminate against blacks and foreclose their right to equal treatment for decades, and that they have no right in this era of integration to expect any special treatment. That position is just reprehensible, but it’ll be a cold day in hell before you acknowledge that.

 

Isn't that exactly what strict scrutiny is?

As a general rule, the government can't discriminate on the basis of race, but there are exceptions. If they do, the state must prove that such discrimination serves a compelling governmental purpose and is narrowly tailored to achieve that purpose.

And doesn't Sotomayor subscribe to such a standard?

 

Show me where I said that or apologize.

 

Just because most meet the minimum qualifications doesn’t mean they are all equal. My son met the minimum qualifications for a high school program he applied for. He made it to the final round, which required scoring in the 97th percentile in math and science on the Iowa test. At that point, everyone met that qualification. He wasn’t accepted because, among that group, he didn’t score high enough on the final exam. Only about the top 20% of that last group made it in. It would not have made sense to just have a lottery or base the final decision on racial quotas.

 

This is a long way from the lofty rhetoric of "the best way to end racial discrimination is to not discriminate based on race"

 

I am simply asking the left-leaning justices on the Supreme Court to acknowledge that their own standard has exceptions.

 

You never come right out and say it, but it’s the essence of your position.

 

Evidence? Link?

 

I understand all that and I’m not trying to minimize it. I’m just saying if a college has a 10% acceptance rate then it’s fair to say most applicants couldn’t have made it in even there were a colorblind acceptance policy.

 

They don't have express quotas, but they do make their admissions decisions with a view toward maintaining their racial balance. That leads to materially lower objective qualifications for URMs than whites/Asians, as the chart above shows.

 

There's an argument to be made that they could raise their minimum standards if they wanted to be truly meritocratic, but again between the application fees they make money on and potentially pissing off the rich parent of a legacy who sucks at sports, probably not going to happen. Personally I dont think there is much of a difference when you are dealing with people in that tier. Even a test is arbitrary. I suppose people think its more 'fair' than a lottery, but I don't think it really impacts the quality of student. These things are all just weed-outs to protect artificial exclusivity. Its good training for people to accept their stations and hierarchies, thats mostly what our educational system is for. Thats why the fight over who gets to go to elite schools is so acrimonious.

 

Come on man, own up to it and stop being disingenuous. Your entire self-congratulatory position is don’t discriminate based on race when that’s what America did for many, many decades. I don’t like the notion of affirmative action, but when it comes to blacks, I think it’s necessary (even as I place some of the blame on them for their lack of achievement).

 

Sorry, but how can something that isn't measured by the school be measured accurately in a chart? Unless you know the school's metrics, it seems like measuring assumptions to me.

 

You're arguing for equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. The opportunity is there. As laid out a few pages back, more caucasian and Asians apply (as a percentage of their population) than do African-Americans. At least show up to the dance. If they deny you entry, then we can talk about why you were denied entry. That's not the case here. They're simply not applying to UF.

 

No, I will not concede to your lying about my position. And congratulations, you have done so one too many times. You have earned a spot on the ignore list. I can't stop you from continuing to spew crap, but I can stop myself from acknowledging it.

Goodbye. Go with God. I wish you all the best.

 

I'm not sure I follow. The school does measure the racial composition of its student body and tries to maintain that composition when making admissions decisions from year to year.

 

When you view humans as a statistic, it doesn't matter. When you view humans as individuals, that person who worked hard and wanted to go to UF, but gets denied because of something unconstitutional, even one person who is affected is greatly impacted and it's a crime.