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

Harvard is not “the government”.

UNC is a public institution. But I’m not sure what they are doing is “moving the fences in 100ft”. It’s not like they get special grading considerations or they are taking wholly unqualified students through that process (other than athletes, where all state U’s are willing to take a drastically lower tier of student for entertainment). Just seems hypocritical to be ok with “students” to have 900 SAT but are there purely for sports, then get all hung up because a small % of students get admitted for “affirmative action” with far less variation to the admitted range of serious students.

There are more “race blind” ways to accomplish the same goal, I just don’t see it as a big deal if they want to use race part of their big picture to make sure that as a state institution they are serving the needs of all communities in the state.

 

Do you think athletic scholarships are offered on the basis of affirmative action or meritocracy? One can consistently hold to meritocracy as a general principle, and also support athletes getting scholarships on the basis of their ability to help the team compete. If you apply the exact same philosophy to student admissions, then I don't see anything hypocritical about that.

On the other hand, if you believe in diversity in student admissions, then I think it is hypocritical to not have the same system in place for athletic admissions.

 

Harvard is asking the government to sanction reverse discrimination. Without the government's blessing, their activity is unconstitutional.

 

They're only interested in "fairness" if they get to re-write the definition of fair.

 

I actually don’t like that there are two classes of students, and in NIL-professional era I’ve advocated UF leave the SEC/NCAA and go to a non-scholarship model of sports. I’m sort of “over” college sports for the most part. Although I did tune in to this past basketball season and probably will again. I guess I’m a masochist and somewhat of a hypocrite just in basketball. I do still like March Madness. College football is dead to me, and I pretty much never paid much attention to anything else in the “non-revenue” side of the ledger anyway.

 

The “but there’s not enough white guys on the basketball team, hurr durr” is never going to be anything but a weak, child-like counter point to real issues.

 

Yeah, I didn't say anything about white guys on the basketball team. You seem very eager to make up things that other posters never said. You either have ADHD or you're just really bad at debating.

 

But that would be consistency across the board if diversity trumps meritocracy.

 

Speaking of ADHD, you responded to Contra’s post on “reverse descrimination” in sports and rated it “winner”. You didn’t read it first? Or you forgot 2 minutes later? Weird. There’s drugs to help with that.

 

I suppose if you want to be an
“absolutist”. I just think sports is relatively trivial, whereas access to higher ed is anything but.

At a state U, any one sports team (even football) is just a puny slice of the student population, it’s not a representative sample. It’s like worrying if there are too many Asians in the Chemisty department, or too many Russians in Computer sciences. Do diversity efforts get down at that micro level? I wouldn’t think so, personally I think that’s where it would get excessive.

Further, even in the universe of sports there are those that go nearly 100% the other way in terms of lack of diversity. Think Golf, Tennis, Swimming, etc. I don’t think schools need worry about micromanaging diversity at that granular sport by sport level, but it’s good for sports themselves to do diversity outreach in youth sports to try to increase access and opportunity…

 

People do not go to prison for human nature. They go to prison for human actions.

 

Can you show me where he said there are not enough white guys on the basketball team? Now you are attributing things to him he didn't say. That's three posters I can think of off top of my head who today you've attributed things to that they never said. There's not a drug for that, by the way. They're probably going to need institutionalize you since you keep seeing things that aren't there.

 

You are familiar with paraphrasing? That was the crux of point he was making. It isn’t a new or novel argument. It’s actually a bit predictable.

He actually followed up on the discussion just fine, so the only confusion appears to be on your part.

If his take is “meritocracy absolutist’ I can understand the view, I just disagree with it.

 

If? You're so sure that's what he was saying, you're using the word "if." And now you're "paraphrasing?"

He posed a question to you, to illustrate how ridiculous your thinking is on this. He's not actually saying we need more white players on the basketball team. That may be what you're seeing in your demented mind, but that's not what he was saying and neither was I. Would highly appreciate if you can find something to help you with that little problem you have and cease inserting words that were never written.

 

Everyday a right wing radical remains out of the oval office is a good day for me

 

Currently not doing you much good, is it?

 

Of course it is

 

Yes but those actions are greatly, DIRECTLY influenced by circumstances. See exhibit A Haiti

 

I think this is a good move overall. Will continue to force admissions professionals to adapt and progress and they for sure will. It’s not like they’re going to give up on this issue. More nuance was definitely needed. It’s too bad they didn’t do away with legacy and pay to play garbage at the same time.

regardless it forces some reflection and change and I think that will be a net positive for admissions.

 

It might be a positive in that respect, but it's a very bad move overall.