<p>It sucks being asian and applying to colleges</p>
<p>It sucks even more to try to play the "I'm not the stereotypical asian" card to get in, because its insulting your own hardworking race.</p>
<p>Why did some random person decide the gene that decides the pigment in your skin decide what "race" you are? Why can't they use something like hair color.</p>
<p>Life sucks</p>
<p>So do my sentences</p>
<p>and ketchup in mashed potatoes</p>
<p>Nah, I was like that, it's really not THAT bad</p>
<p>So what happens when every single Asian tries to distance him/herself from the stereotype?</p>
<p>The rejection of the stereotype becomes the stereotype.</p>
<p>And the rejection of their own culture.</p>
<p>This thread depresses me.</p>
<p>lollybo: no way</p>
<p>I play lacrosse, I'm in a hip-hop group and I dress in underground streetwear brands. That doesn't mean I'm not the loudest mother****er shouting "daehanmingook" during the world cup. I moved here when I was two and I only speak korean to my parents. I haven't forgotten where i'm from.</p>
<p>come on...race is never a large determining factor, affirmative action is illegal too. Just make yourself more qualified than the rest. Also, show that you have more character.</p>
<p>
[quote]
affirmative action is illegal too
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I assume you are being sarcastic...</p>
<p>hellooo... did you ever hear of the landmark supreme court case </p>
<p>Bollinger v. University of Michigan</p>
<p>Determined that affirmative action cannot be used as a determining factor in college admissions.</p>
<p>seriously not true. i think on this forum this whole strategy and playing cards for admission thing is overdone. Just spend high school doing things you like, and then list the things you have done on your app...</p>
<p>that simple</p>
<p>Lol asayed, I'm pretty sure the court decision was only referring to public universities. I'm not sure, though. I'm just guessing, because many colleges give preferences to under-represented minorities.</p>
<p>asayedahmad08, you are a complete fool.
I took a law & society class this summer and studied the issue in-depth.</p>
<p>The majority opinion in grutter v. bollinger replied to the question:
do race-conscious programs in public university admissions polices violate the fourtheenth amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law with NO.</p>
<p>Sandra Day O'Connor wrote for the majority. Look it up.</p>
<p>Affirmative action is legal everywhere. Go look at a college's stuff that is mailed to you. They'll always say somewhere "BLAH is an equal opportunity institution" and then have some fluffed up statement that basically means bluntly that they use AA.</p>
<p>asians need to stop *****ing</p>
<p>Actually, read the thread that I linked. The college rep from JHU says its against the rules.</p>
<p>Here I got this from the official website. Maybe it will clear things up.</p>
<p>Gratz v. Bollinger
539 U.S. 244 (2003)
Docket Number: 02-516
Abstract</p>
<p>Decided:
June 23, 2003</p>
<p>Argued:
April 1, 2003</p>
<p>Facts of the Case
In 1995, Jennifer Gratz applied to the University of Michigan's College of Literature, Science and the Arts with an adjusted GPA of 3.8 and ACT score of 25. In 1997, Patrick Hamacher applied to the University with an adjusted GPA of 3.0, and an ACT score of 28. Both were denied admission and attended other schools. The University admits that it uses race as a factor in making admissions decisions because it serves a "compelling interest in achieving diversity among its student body." In addition, the University has a policy to admit virtually all qualified applicants who are members of one of three select racial minority groups - African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans - that are considered to be "underrepresented" on the campus. Concluding that diversity was a compelling interest, the District Court held that the admissions policies for years 1995-1998 were not narrowly tailored, but that the policies in effect in 1999 and 2000 were narrowly tailored. After the decision in Grutter, Gratz and Hamacher petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court pursuant to Rule 11 for a writ of certiorari before judgment, which was granted. </p>
<p>Question Presented
Does the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? </p>
<p>Conclusion
Yes. In a 6-3 opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violates both the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI. While rejecting the argument that diversity cannot constitute a compelling state interest, the Court reasoned that the automatic distribution of 20 points, or one-fifth of the points needed to guarantee admission, to every single "underrepresented minority" applicant solely because of race was not narrowly tailored and did not provide the individualized consideration Justice Powell contemplated in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978). Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, "because the University's use of race in its current freshman admissions policy is not narrowly tailored to achieve respondents' asserted compelling interest in diversity, the admissions policy violates the Equal Protection Clause."</p>
<p>Grutter and Gratz v. Bollinger (The University of Michigan case in question) only banned the use of a numerical/quota advantage for affirmative action (UM gave every URM +20 points in its 150 point scale), while the use of race as a "plus factor" was explicity allowed and reaffirmed.</p>
<p>Look it up.</p>
<p>I love how the JHU guy's diction: "Court rules against OFFICIAL affirmative action policies a few years back in a highly publicized case involving the University of Michigan."</p>
<p>I don't get what's so wrong with affirmative action. Religious schools can segregate their students by religion, so why can't private schools segregate people by race?</p>
<p>Private schools? vs Publics?</p>
<p>I dont want any publics using AA, but privates are their own separate institutions, so if they want to...whatever. But I don't want my hard earned taxpayer money to go towards schools that utilize AA.</p>