Supreme Court: Race-based High School Admission Illegal

Pre-College Issues High School Life
181

<p><a href="love%20the%20username%20btw">QUOTE</a>

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
I HATE that the Democrats stereotype all hispanics and african americans for not having opportunities and attempt to provide "equal results

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>I agree. To me it sounds almost condescending to URMs, almost as if the government is basically saying, "You're too stupid to get in anyway, but it's not your fault, so you need a little boost." This is, of course, not true.</p>

<p>You might not guess I would be saying this based on my username, but here's a new idea: How 'bout we try to lessen the government's influence in defining race for us and we try to get rid of some of these programs that try to make the lives of Americans better but do the opposite? After all, race is a continuous spectrum.</p>

182

<p>Haha, i'll help the pro-AA crowd...who i guess has resorted to a flame war.</p>

<p>wow, some people still haven't realized that AA IS NOT racism. While i agree that capping asian enrollment IS racism, AA in itself is not. </p>

<p>If AA was racism then the group that's favored, lets say african americans, would comprise a lot bigger portion of universities or the group that is discriminated against, asians maybe, would represent a much smaller portion. </p>

<p>AA is not racist because it isn't saying that any group is superior or inferior, just that diversity is an important goal. </p>

<p>You can't justify socioeconomic AA without also justifying racial AA, they are based on the same principles of diversity. If a school is race blind it should be need blind as well.</p>

<p>The point about comparing the mostly asian immigrants to the native african americans is very valid, you can't compare the top 2% of a population to the entire 100% of another population. </p>

<p>As for the black judge, he is looking at AA as if it's primary goal is reparations. It's not. It's diversity and the representation of urms.</p>

<p>^^^^ No that's not what the government is saying, that's not what most urms feel the government is saying. Many black anti-AA spokespeople only have that view because non-urm AA opponents have told them that this is what it's saying. And honestly the people who have that opinion of people who get into college through AA really aren't the type of people we want making decisions in this society.</p>

183

<p>
[quote]
He does not share or seem to understand the plight of his fellow African Americans. He is against AA, which is funny because it was partly because of AA that he even got to where he is now

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The duty of Justice Clarence Thomas is to interpret the law of the United States. He has no other obligation.</p>

<p>I remind you that our judiciary is independent. Our judges should not be weighed down by any special-interest groups.</p>

184

<p>
[quote]
As for the black judge, he is looking at AA as if it's primary goal is reparations. It's not. It's diversity and the representation of urms.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh boy. You didn't read the quotes, did you? The "black judge" (a highly respected Supreme Court Justice) directly addressed the "diversity" issue (indeed, he hardly discussed reparations) in noting that the benefits of racial diversity were most likely nonexistent.</p>

185

<p>Tyler, I consider racial AA to be racist because it puts qualified kids of other races at a disadvantage.</p>

<p>Also socio-economic and racial AA are very different philosophically. Socio-economic AA provides an advantage for those who don't have the resources to compete at the same level as others. Racial AA assumes that certain races don't have the resources to compete at the same level as others and attempts to change that.</p>

<p>A school's need blind status is more of an assertion that it won't discriminate against someone with low affluence i.e., those that cannot pay the full price.</p>

186

<p>Tyler,</p>

<p>
[quote]
While i agree that capping asian enrollment IS racism, AA in itself is not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Thank you! I am glad to read that from you.</p>

<p>Affirmative action need not be racist, I agree. In fact, it was originally intended to be staunchly anti-racist. Its purpose was to ensure that no one was discriminated against based on race, gender, and other factors. Unfortunately, this purpose has been lost over the past few decades, and the system has morphed into one of racial preference. I am for all attempts to revert back to the spirit of what affirmative action is – colorblindness.</p>

<p>The change from colorblindness to racial preference is not progress. Though I use the word “revert,” I believe that by going back to the original intention, we are moving forward.</p>

<p>You say that we shouldn’t compare immigrants to black and Hispanic Americans because we shouldn’t compare the “top 2%” of a group to two other entire groups. I ask you, what about simply comparing the top 2% of both groups? In 1995, the wealthiest black students did not appreciably score higher than the poorest Asian students. The average SAT score for black students with family incomes greater than $70,000 in that year was 850 out of 1600. The average score for Asian students with family incomes less than $10,000 was 825 out of 1600. The “top 2%” of black students were barely more competitive than the remaining 98% of Asian students. As a reference, the average SAT score for Asians with family incomes greater than $70,000 was 1075, a 225 point difference.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Many black anti-AA spokespeople only have that view because non-urm AA opponents have told them that this is what it's saying.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Are you suggesting that black opponents of racial preferences aren’t thinking for themselves?</p>

187

<p>At a disadvantage? to whom? the 12% of non-athlete urms?</p>

<p>Racial AA does not assume that certain races dont have the resources, thats the misconception that AA is meant as reparation. Socioeconomic AA discriminates against the middle class in the same way that Racial AA discriminates against whites and asians. </p>

<p>A university considering a students class when evaluating an applicant is not AA. Socioeconomic AA is when a university wants representation of all classes. Racial AA is not a university looking at a black applicant and holding them to a different standard, but when a university wants representation of all races.</p>

188

<p>fabrizio, </p>

<p>you are half-right, AAs original intention was to make sure that nobody is discriminated against IN SOCIETY. Its belief is that if african americans make up a certain portion of the population, they should also make up around that portion at all higher institutions so that all races have equal power in society. Higher education has a direct correlation to power in society so in order for african americans to have equal power in society, they should be proportionately represented in higher education. </p>

<p>THAT is the original belief of AA. Today it is moreso a matter of diversity. </p>

<p>-your comparison above is still comparing the top 2% to the entire 100%. You just misunderstood, the statement was that because The vast majority of Asians are first and second generation immigrants, they are the top 2% as far as drive goes of where they are coming from. </p>

<p>--I do think the black judge is thinking for himself, but on the same bases that black teens often think that if they take AP classes they are "acting white" based on what white peers and now black peers tell them.</p>

189

<p>
[QUOTE]
You can't justify socioeconomic AA without also justifying racial AA, they are based on the same principles of diversity. If a school is race blind it should be need blind as well.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>I can confirm that a group of rich, preppy black kids is virtually the same as a group of rich, preppy white kids.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
He does not share or seem to understand the plight of his fellow African Americans. He is against AA, which is funny because it was partly because of AA that he even got to where he is now

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Clarence Thomas, for anyone who doesn't know, is an extreme conservative to the point of being almost reactionary. To me, this other means he supports a tiny government or he enjoys bombing cities of people who look different, especially if they live in the Middle East. However, if he feels he has moral or ethical responsibility to do something regardless of his race, he should do that, and in this case, whether he really has such responsibility or not, he certainly feels he does. Also, the comment that AA was part of how he got where he was seems condescending to African-Americans and other URMs.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
The "black judge" (a highly respected Supreme Court Justice) directly addressed the "diversity" issue (indeed, he hardly discussed reparations) in noting that the benefits of racial diversity were most likely nonexistent.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>I actually agree with Mr. Thomas on this point. Racial diversity plays little role in actual discussion (see above) unless accompanied by socioeconomic, geographical, or political diversity. The first two are easily obtainable by colleges.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
Socio-economic AA provides an advantage for those who don't have the resources to compete at the same level as others. Racial AA assumes that certain races don't have the resources to compete at the same level as others and attempts to change that.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>I wouldn't say racial AA is racist, but more just flawed because it doesn't do what it's supposed to; it helps the privileged URMs as opposed to the ones who need help (see my earlier post on the last page). Coincidentally, this latter group is the group that is more likely to contribute real diversity. This post hit the difference between racial and socioeconomic AA right on the nail. It's the assumption that irks me.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
I am for all attempts to revert back to the spirit of what affirmative action is – colorblindness.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Agreed. All groups should be on an equal footing; none should be given a step up above the rest.</p>

<p>To sum up my argument in a few sentences, affirmative action does not do what it was supposed to do. Because it targets the privileged URMs who are more likely to already have the motivation and resources to apply to top colleges instead of those who would actually add new viewpoints, it fails to add more diversity. A better solution would be to create more programs to target underprivileged kids in general when they are younger and more easily influenced.</p>

190

<p>I'd like to here your response to my response to fabrizios post, just curious.</p>

191

<p>Okay if AA did not help him,Clarence Thomas, or any other Black person or other minority, even Asians, in this country achieve, what was it? I find it hard to believe that "racist America" suddenly started to like minorities right after AA was implemented. </p>

<p>The help that minorities receive from AA does not downplay the abilities of those it helps, it only allows and forces people to notice their abilities. That's what a lot of people on CC are confused about. They believe that because AA helps minorities get into college, that minorities are obviously less intelligent than they are. Which is not true. White people don't even have to worry about us taking over the colleges anyway, they're still in the majority. </p>

<p>As for Asians, they obviously don't realize that because of AA, they are the biggest, by far, minority in colleges. Without the civil rights movement that many Black people led and are still leading, because it is not over, Asians, like the rest of us, would not be allowed to got to college either. </p>

<p>If AA were merely race-based how will that help the problem of poverty and the gap between the rich and the poor in America? There are more white people in poverty than Black people because whites are in the majority. But...the percentage of the Black population in poverty is a lot higher than the percentage of white population in poverty. So if admissions were just income-based, it would just be a lot of white people getting into college because most people in poverty are white. That would not be helping anything. But if we were to help this higher percentage of Black people in poverty, than we could help level out education in America. </p>

<p>And AA is not only needed for college admissions. There are still many Black people who cannot get a job because of the skin color. Or if they're just reviewing an application, because of their name. Even with the implementation of AA, this is still happening a lot. </p>

<p>The civil rights movement is not over people, so wake up and accept it. This is not Disney Channel.</p>

192

<p>


You just proved my point. You have no solution.</p>

193

<p>TrackBabi17, what do you base this assumption off of :
And AA is not only needed for college admissions. There are still many Black people who cannot get a job because of the skin color. Or if they're just reviewing an application, because of their name. Even with the implementation of AA, this is still happening a lot. </p>

<p>Link: (Cosby Remarks) How many people agree with this: I do.
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37869-2004May18.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37869-2004May18.html&lt;/a> </p>

<p>The Fact is this discussion is null and void with regards to the African American community until some serious cultural changes become widespread: Appreciation of Education and I don't mean ebonics</p>

194

<p>I googled some articles and you caqn find more if you do the same:
<a href="http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/PO/releases/2004/june/fiveyears.aspx?ComponentId=2064&SourcePageId=1405%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/PO/releases/2004/june/fiveyears.aspx?ComponentId=2064&SourcePageId=1405&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_19961224/ai_n10096242%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_19961224/ai_n10096242&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Cosby's remarks are correct but they do not disprove mine. Please tell me why I'm wrong, in your own words</p>

195

<p>I don't if anyone else from Louisville- the district where one of the suits came from- has posted in this thread, but maybe my input could be used...</p>

<p>Louisville is still a very racially divided- Black people live west of I-65, and white people live East of I-65. My first black neighbors in 13 years recently moved in. </p>

<p>Neighborhood schools, as many people seem to prefer, would not successfully integrate anyone. Firstly, there are three high schools that are within 100 square mile quadrant where about 250,000 of the cities wealthiest (and sadly, whitest) people live- some kids will have to go to high school 20 and 30 minutes away, because schools were not built to accommodate the shift in population to the east of the city. Secondly, the city is racially divided. If we went to neighborhood schools, I would go to school with about 95% white class mates. </p>

<p>Our current system was working well for most people. Yes, race was a big factor, but I personally did not know any qualified white kids who lost their spot in one of the districts top three schools to a minority based solely on race. The women who brought the suit was new to the district, and quite honestly, probably didn't understand how to select the right elementary school for her kid. While I agree that she should not have had her children be bussed to a school 45 minutes away, there were plenty of possibilities for that women to find a good school only 20 minutes away from where she lived. </p>

<p>So what happens now? Well, I personally am frightened, because I was a transfer student myself. Yes, I was a well qualified white kid, and I was admitted to my high school of choice, just like all my other friends. If I was forced to go to my neighborhood school, I would 1.) not have the same educational opportunities I have now, 2.) would be separated from my best friends, and 3.) would enter into a school that is not exactly socially accepting for me- I know numerous students who faced harassment and assault there, and who transferred out. </p>

<p>While I am safe at my current school for the next year, and am confident that I will be able to remain there with whatever policy is enacted for the 2008-2009 school year (my senior year), I am saddened that because of one womens frustrations, close to 50,000 under privileged minority students may be forced into sub-par inner city schools that will simply not offer them the same positive learning environment. In a city like Louisville, any policy that does not at least indirectly include race is sure to short change people of color. </p>

<p>I hope white people who have gotten everything they wanted because our society is set up to benefit them realize how lucky they are. Perhaps I can get NHS hours by going to the newly segregated inner city schools and tutor them in what education system is probably going to fail to teach them.</p>

196

<p>I didn't say you were wrong, I asked your basis for the quote I posted above. Oh and Cutting Occam's Razor out of your argument: making all scholarships availiable based on merit and need could cull the white majority as you called it. It would require a lot more work on the basis of college admissions offices and high schools alike and perhaps that is idealistic but at the same time it is neccessary to wean AA off of a main race base and onto a more socio-economic and merit base </p>

<p>I look foward to your comments.</p>

197

<p>But then, based on my explanation above, that would not help any of the problems that we have in the US</p>

198

<p>Tyler,</p>

<p>
[quote]

Its belief is that if african americans make up a certain portion of the population, they should also make up around that portion at all higher institutions so that all races have equal power in society.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That was not part of the original intention of affirmative action. Quotas came afterward and were ruled illegal in Bakke.</p>

<p>
[quote]
-your comparison above is still comparing the top 2% to the entire 100%. You just misunderstood, the statement was that because The vast majority of Asians are first and second generation immigrants, they are the top 2% as far as drive goes of where they are coming from.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I compared upper middle class black students with poverty-level Asian students and showed that despite the ridiculous income gap, on average the black students barely outperformed the Asian students (twenty-five points). The black upper middle class exists, but it is by no means “the entire 100%.” I then offered the average score for upper middle class Asian students, which was 225 points higher than the same number for upper middle class black students. </p>

<p>Please don’t refer to Justice Clarence Thomas as “the black judge.” At least call him Thomas.</p>

<p>I didn’t buy your explanation. You simply stated that you think Thomas isn’t thinking for himself. I couldn’t disagree more. Thomas takes a unique activist approach to his jurisprudence. According to fellow Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, Thomas “doesn’t believe in stare decisis period.” Thomas thus very much thinks for himself and issues his opinions accordingly.</p>

199

<p>Introducing non race based equality into the United States would not solve any problems ? Did you misunderstand me?</p>

200

<p>There’s no doubt that affirmative action and the Civil Rights Movement helped Justice Thomas. Even so, he is still not obligated to kowtow to a special-interest group. His sole duty is to interpret the law.</p>

<p>
[quote]

They believe that because AA helps minorities get into college, that minorities are obviously less intelligent than they are.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, “they” believe that minorities are as good as everyone else. “They” believe that as a consequence, minorities don’t need preferential treatment. “They” are for treating all Americans equally.</p>

<p>I do not contest that affirmative action helped Asians enter postsecondary education at ever higher rates. Things have changed since the 1960s, though. Now, affirmative action has mutated into a wholly different beast. Instead of advocating colorblindness, it advocates color consciousness, often to the detriment of Asian students as shown by researchers Espenshade and Chung.</p>

<p>
[quote]

So if admissions were just income-based, it would just be a lot of white people getting into college because most people in poverty are white. That would not be helping anything. But if we were to help this higher percentage of Black people in poverty, than we could help level out education in America.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I disagree that it “would not be helping anything.” It would give some Americans the opportunity to reduce the income gap through higher education. Are you assuming that poor whites will always do better than poor blacks? I don’t buy that. As I wrote, I believe blacks are every bit as qualified as everyone else. Hence, they should be treated equally, like everyone else.</p>

<p>It is a twisted irony that this type of thinking was labeled “liberal” three decades ago but is now considered “racist.”</p>

<p>The Civil Rights Movement is far from over. I agree with you. Of course, we have different conceptions as to how it should continue. I support the efforts of Mr. Ward Connerly to let the American people decide whether their states should tolerate racial preferences or not. I believe that to achieve colorblindness, we should do away with color-conscious policies.</p>