Justice Scalia's comments

[JohnHammond]

I'm impressed these 4.0 students couldn't make the top 10 percent of their class.

When the top end of the scale is 4.3, I'm not surprised.

 

[User 11148]

I'm impressed these 4.0 students couldn't make the top 10 percent of their class.

Lots of 'em went to Lake Woebegone High ... You gotta bring it to crack the top decile there ...

 

[Dick Whitman]

I went to (1) a small, woodwork private school with almost no racial diversity, though I was personally enriched being around people diverse from my own area - it was a good ol' boy student body, and I was a suburbanite; (2) a BCS school that has been at the center of some of these cases. I believe the diversity - both racial and geographic - was personally enriching ; (3) a well-known private school that falls somewhere in between, unless you include Asians. It was the best educational experience of the three, mostly because of the diversity of thought and ideas, which the BCS school lacked.

 

[dirtybird]

When the top end of the scale is 4.3, I'm not surprised.

It can as high as 5.0 in some systems. Part of going soft on the youth, same as suing a school because an unexceptional student wasn't let in. (I know that's mostly a distraction)

 

[YankeeFan]

 

[qtlaw]

The diversity argument is a canard, made out of whole cloth as a means of getting around prohibitions on race-based favoritism.

In a twisted way, this is true. I worked on the affirmative action admissions committees both in undergrad and law school. The point is not some pure race based point system where minorities get admitted at "lower" scores.

The point is to give credence to those who are less fortunate and achieve notwithstanding the obstacles faced.

You think some suburbanite white kid who's never worked a day in his/her life, who has tutors at their beckon call and has a 4.0 is vastly superior to a minority kid with two uneducated working parents, who has to help raise his/her 4 siblings AND works 40 hours a week AND wrestles? That's affirmative action, giving kids credit for achieving in less traditional circumstances. Those are kids that I was proud to recommend for admission under affirmative action goals.

And no it wasn't purely race based criteria, we applied the same criteria to "others" who did not fit the traditional minority classes, which meant disadvantaged caucasians as well, as any affirmative action program should IMHO.

 

[LongTimeListener]

The university system doesn't give a crap about high-achieving, low-income white kids. Can't check off a box anywhere.

 

[heyabbott]

In a twisted way, this is true. I worked on the affirmative action admissions committees both in undergrad and law school. The point is not some pure race based point system where minorities get admitted at "lower" scores.

The point is to give credence to those who are less fortunate and achieve notwithstanding the obstacles faced.

You think some suburbanite white kid who's never worked a day in his/her life, who has tutors at their beckon call and has a 4.0 is vastly superior to a minority kid with two uneducated working parents, who has to help raise his/her 4 siblings AND works 40 hours a week AND wrestles? That's affirmative action, giving kids credit for achieving in less traditional circumstances. Those are kids that I was proud to recommend for admission under affirmative action goals.

And no it wasn't purely race based criteria, we applied the same criteria to "others" who did not fit the traditional minority classes, which meant disadvantaged caucasians as well, as any affirmative action program should IMHO.

Why should any of that apply to Grad/Professional Schools? I understand the argument for undergrad to consider people who have been disadvantaged and may have to deal with issues that others not economically disadvantaged have not faced. I think discriminating against someone or in favor of someone to make the yearbook photos look like a Benetton catalogue is trash. But giving the disadvantaged a different look may have a place. As I said before, just make it plain. Tell the applicants the criteria.
But to get a doctorate in bio-chemistry or physics or a medical or law degree, you have a 4 year accredited University to determine, objectively, if they are the best candidate. What is the need for race based admissions in post-grad?

 

[The Big Ragu]

In a twisted way, this is true. I worked on the affirmative action admissions committees both in undergrad and law school. The point is not some pure race based point system where minorities get admitted at "lower" scores.

The point is to give credence to those who are less fortunate and achieve notwithstanding the obstacles faced.

You think some suburbanite white kid who's never worked a day in his/her life, who has tutors at their beckon call and has a 4.0 is vastly superior to a minority kid with two uneducated working parents, who has to help raise his/her 4 siblings AND works 40 hours a week AND wrestles? That's affirmative action, giving kids credit for achieving in less traditional circumstances. Those are kids that I was proud to recommend for admission under affirmative action goals.

And no it wasn't purely race based criteria, we applied the same criteria to "others" who did not fit the traditional minority classes, which meant disadvantaged caucasians as well, as any affirmative action program should IMHO.

If your goal is truly to give kids credit for achieving under less traditional circumstances, race doesn't have to enter the equation. A university could do a color / race blind application that evaluates applicants' experiences using the kinds of criteria you wrote about for those who are less fortunate, without ever having a checkbox on an application that asks if you are white or black or asian or any other race, couldn't they?

 

[JohnHammond]

"Best" candidate isn't an objective measure.

 

[JohnHammond]

If your goal is truly to give kids credit for achieving under less traditional circumstances, race doesn't have to enter the equation. A university could do a color / race blind application that evaluates applicants' experiences using the kinds of criteria you wrote about for those who are less fortunate, without ever having a checkbox on an application that asks if you are white or black or asian or any other race, couldn't they?

Bring on the app from a wealthy kid saving the world by spending a week talking selfies in Central America

 

[YankeeFan]

In a twisted way, this is true. I worked on the affirmative action admissions committees both in undergrad and law school. The point is not some pure race based point system where minorities get admitted at "lower" scores.

The point is to give credence to those who are less fortunate and achieve notwithstanding the obstacles faced.

You think some suburbanite white kid who's never worked a day in his/her life, who has tutors at their beckon call and has a 4.0 is vastly superior to a minority kid with two uneducated working parents, who has to help raise his/her 4 siblings AND works 40 hours a week AND wrestles? That's affirmative action, giving kids credit for achieving in less traditional circumstances. Those are kids that I was proud to recommend for admission under affirmative action goals.

And no it wasn't purely race based criteria, we applied the same criteria to "others" who did not fit the traditional minority classes, which meant disadvantaged caucasians as well, as any affirmative action program should IMHO.

Upper and upper middle class black kids often benefit from these programs, while poor white kids are given no additional advantage.

 

[Ace]

Upper and upper middle class black kids often benefit from these programs, while poor white kids are given no additional advantage.

Not having to go to the University of Texas is advantage enough!

(Gig 'em, Aggies)

 

[qtlaw]

Upper and upper middle class black kids often benefit from these programs, while poor white kids are given no additional advantage.

Not in the programs I administered.

 

[cranberry]

If your goal is truly to give kids credit for achieving under less traditional circumstances, race doesn't have to enter the equation. A university could do a color / race blind application that evaluates applicants' experiences using the kinds of criteria you wrote about for those who are less fortunate, without ever having a checkbox on an application that asks if you are white or black or asian or any other race, couldn't they?

I think the point is that there are numerous objectives in trying to create a richly diverse community of students and race and ethnicity can and should factor into the equation, as well. As the court ruled in Fisher, as a "factor of a factor."

 

[qtlaw]

If your goal is truly to give kids credit for achieving under less traditional circumstances, race doesn't have to enter the equation. A university could do a color / race blind application that evaluates applicants' experiences using the kinds of criteria you wrote about for those who are less fortunate, without ever having a checkbox on an application that asks if you are white or black or asian or any other race, couldn't they?

That was how our programs were administered, the groupings were based on race for application evaluations, but it was color-blind in the sense that everyone got to participate in the program.

As a socio-economic based program, it would have weeded out the "middle- and upper- class" minorities.

 

[qtlaw]

As to the question of access to graduate studies, those programs have just as great a need, if not more, to be gateways to diversity in educators and role models. Its very important for minorities to have a presence that others can see.

 

[X-Hack]

And to provide professional services in communities that would otherwise be even more underserved.

 

[The Big Ragu]

That was how our programs were administered, the groupings were based on race for application evaluations, but it was color-blind in the sense that everyone got to participate in the program.

As a socio-economic based program, it would have weeded out the "middle- and upper- class" minorities.

I am not sure I follow this. Why do you have groupings based on race in your admissions process?

 

[cjericho]

To promote diversity and inclusion?