SC upholds UT Affirmative Action.

[Atreus21]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...3bcc10-394d-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

The Supreme Court on Thursday said admissions officials at the University of Texas may consider the race of student applicants in a limited way to build a diverse student body.

The 4-to-3 decision was a surprising win for advocates of affirmative action, who say the benefits of diversity at the nation’s colleges and universities are worth the intrusion on the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection that generally forbids the government from making decisions based on racial classifications.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the university’s consideration of race was a “factor of a factor of a factor” and met the court’s narrow precedents.

“A university is in large part defined by those intangible qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness,” Kennedy wrote in the court’s majority opinion.

“Considerable deference is owed to a university in defining those intangible characteristics, like student body diversity, that are central to its identity and educational mission,” he wrote. “But still, it remains an enduring challenge to our Nation’s education system to reconcile the pursuit of diversity with the constitutional promise of equal treatment and dignity.”

[Deadlocked justices block Obama on immigration]

When the court considered the case in 2013, Kennedy wrote the opinion that sent it back to lower courts for a closer examination, and it seemed that the majority was skeptical at the time that the admissions plan would survive.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. began his 51-page dissent: “Something strange has happened since our prior decision in this case.” And he added that “the university has still not identified with any degree of specificity the interests that its use of race and ethnicity is supposed to serve.”

He read the lengthy dissent from the bench to stress his disagreement. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Clarence Thomas joined his opinion.

Kennedy had never before voted to uphold a race-conscious plan, but he also had been reluctant to say that race may never be used. He was joined by three of the courts liberal justices: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. Justice Elena Kagan recused herself because she had worked on the issue as President Obama’s solicitor general.

I never understood the notion of diversity as an end unto itself.

Giving someone greater weight in an admissions process because of certain prejudices you arrive at due to their skin color is racism.

I think the SCOTUS and politicians should be honest. Racism is okay, provided the right races are targeted.

 

[Svnla]

Who said something about not judge a person based on his/her skin color but the content of his/her character? Answer - MLK.

As I said before and I will say it again. Let apply rules and laws equally to EVERYONE. No exception. Period.

 

[ElFenix]

fact of the matter is that less qualified white kids than her also got in. knowing that fact, i have no idea how she had any leg to stand on.

 

[Brainonska511]

fact of the matter is that less qualified white kids than her also got in. knowing that fact, i have no idea how she had any leg to stand on.

And more qualified minorities were also rejected.

https://www.propublica.org/article/...-abigail-fishers-affirmative-action-case-is-r

It's true that the university, for whatever reason, offered provisional admission to some students with lower test scores and grades than Fisher. Five of those students were black or Latino. Forty-two were white.

Neither Fisher nor Blum mentioned those 42 applicants in interviews. Nor did they acknowledge the 168 black and Latino students with grades as good as or better than Fisher's who were also denied entry into the university that year. Also left unsaid is the fact that Fisher turned down a standard UT offer under which she could have gone to the university her sophomore year if she earned a 3.2 GPA at another Texas university school in her freshman year.

 

[senseamp]

Typical right wing victimhood mentality. I didn't make it to my preferred college, must be them black folks' fault.

 

[Subyman]

Affirmative action is supposed to speed up diversity and equality by tipping the scales in favor of those that were banished from equal protection in society for centuries. It was never meant to be a long term solution.

While completely merit based admissions is the dream some day, right now completely merit-based would favor those that are already in power. On the surface it does seem wrong to allow race-based admissions, but we must consider the enormous disadvantages that those that were subjugated for centuries still endure today.

It certainly isn't a ideal solution and I hope some day equality will be so pervasive that these policies are no longer needed. FWIW, they are a "last resort" for colleges.

 

[fskimospy]

I never understood the notion of diversity as an end unto itself.

People who are not exposed to people and cultures outside of their own tend to stunt their growth as individuals and tend to develop seriously wrong ideas about people other than themselves.

Take the South, for example. How many times have you heard hilariously wrong, pejoratives about the South from people who have never lived there and don't know anyone from there? I'm guessing more than a few times. Wouldn't things be better if people were less ignorant of it?

Giving someone greater weight in an admissions process because of certain prejudices you arrive at due to their skin color is racism.

I think the SCOTUS and politicians should be honest. Racism is okay, provided the right races are targeted.

I've never understood the argument of 'trying to correct the ills of racism is racism.' This is similar to the argument that if you hate bigots you're a bigot yourself. The idea that an admissions process that tries to include more minorities is racist would imply that the system that applicants came from wasn't racist.

Can you tell me with a straight face that the average black kid has the same chance to get into top tier universities as the average white kid? If not, why? Are they lazier? Dumber? What? Jon Stewart showed this about as well as anyone could awhile back, it's a great clip to watch.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4u4hqr/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-bill-o-reilly

 

[Jaskalas]

I've never understood the argument of 'trying to correct the ills of racism is racism.'

Any policy that drops merits for race is racist.
All I'm hearing for excuses is that racism in the past requires racism in the present. Sounds a bit like vengeance.
It's good old medieval continuation of eye for an eye.

 

[Sonikku]

AA is racist.

There I said it.

 

[fskimospy]

Any policy that drops merits for race is racist.
All I'm hearing for excuses is that racism in the past requires racism in the present. Sounds a bit like vengeance.

I noticed that you deleted the part of my post that addressed this complaint, why? Say there's the average white kid and the average black kid of exactly equal merit. The white kid comes from circumstances where he will score 1 point higher on the entrance exam despite being exactly as meritorious as the black kid. Why is it racist to account for that? Wouldn't it be racist NOT to account for that?

People who benefit from the current system's racism like to say they just want equal opportunity for everyone regardless of race and so we shouldn't have affirmative action. This requires them to ignore that such equal opportunity isn't even remotely there and has never been.

 

[Subyman]

Any policy that drops merits for race is racist.
All I'm hearing for excuses is that racism in the past requires racism in the present. Sounds a bit like vengeance.
It's good old medieval continuation of eye for an eye.

Affirmative action isn't punitive...

 

[glenn1]

People who are not exposed to people and cultures outside of their own tend to stunt their growth as individuals and tend to develop seriously wrong ideas about people other than themselves.

Take the South, for example. How many times have you heard hilariously wrong, pejoratives about the South from people who have never lived there and don't know anyone from there? I'm guessing more than a few times. Wouldn't things be better if people were less ignorant of it?



I've never understood the argument of 'trying to correct the ills of racism is racism.' This is similar to the argument that if you hate bigots you're a bigot yourself. The idea that an admissions process that tries to include more minorities is racist would imply that the system that applicants came from wasn't racist.

Can you tell me with a straight face that the average black kid has the same chance to get into top tier universities as the average white kid? If not, why? Are they lazier? Dumber? What? Jon Stewart showed this about as well as anyone could awhile back, it's a great clip to watch.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4u4hqr/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-bill-o-reilly

Affirmative action doesn't tend to help those average black kids though. Especially at the elite universities it tends to help the upper middle class or upper class black kids at the expense of average or poor kids of all backgrounds including blacks. The "diversity" it tends to create is no more representative of the average black than a United Colors of Bennetton advertisement.

 

[Artdeco]

I noticed that you deleted the part of my post that addressed this complaint, why? Say there's the average white kid and the average black kid of exactly equal merit. The white kid comes from circumstances where he will score 1 point higher on the entrance exam despite being exactly as meritorious as the black kid. Why is it racist to account for that? Wouldn't it be racist NOT to account for that?

People who benefit from the current system's racism like to say they just want equal opportunity for everyone regardless of race and so we shouldn't have affirmative action. This requires them to ignore that such equal opportunity isn't even remotely there and has never been.

Odd POV considering your disrespect for Eskimos, are you an Eskimo?

 

[fskimospy]

Affirmative action doesn't tend to help those average black kids though. Especially at the elite universities it tends to help the upper middle class or upper class black kids at the expense of average or poor kids of all backgrounds including blacks. The "diversity" it tends to create is no more representative of the average black than a United Colors of Bennetton advertisement.

Even if that were true that would be a failure in implementation not an indictment of the idea. There's nothing about affirmative action that would require that to be the case.

 

[Subyman]

Affirmative action doesn't tend to help those average black kids though. Especially at the elite universities it tends to help the upper middle class or upper class black kids at the expense of average or poor kids of all backgrounds including blacks. The "diversity" it tends to create is no more representative of the average black than a United Colors of Bennetton advertisement.

Statistics on this?

 

[fskimospy]

Odd POV considering your disrespect for Eskimos, are you an Eskimo?

That's a bizarre non-sequitur, hahaha.

 

[Jaskalas]

Affirmative action isn't punitive...

Yes it is.

Either we have enough... boats to lift up everyone, or we do not.
We ration... boats for those based on merit, or based on race.
You are choosing to pick the winners and losers. It is always at the expense of someone.

 

[fskimospy]

Yes it is.

Either we have enough... boats to lift up everyone, or we do not.
We ration... boats for those based on merit, or based on race.
You are choosing to pick the winners and losers. It is always at the expense of someone.

Does everyone have an equal chance to succeed based on their personal merits in our current system of selection regardless of their race, yes or no?

If the answer is no, how is it not racist to ignore this?

 

[Subyman]

Yes it is.

Either we have enough... boats to lift up everyone, or we do not.
We ration... boats for those based on merit, or based on race.
You are choosing to pick the winners and losers. It is always at the expense of someone.

Its not punitive though.

FWIW, nearly all colleges do merit first and if they can't diversify their student base then AA is the last resort.

It is sad how the mechanisms we set in place to help those that were subjugated to slavery and disenfranchisement for centuries is being turned around as a punishment for those that subjugated them. Whose the victim here? You?

 

[glenn1]

Statistics on this?

This is hardly a new revelation. It's been widely discussed for years. That's why policies that counterbalance some of the class effects should be preferred, for example I think it's Texas who guarantees admission to their flagship universities for the top __% of graduates from each school district. That means that Joe the dirt poor black from the inner city and terrible underfunded school can compete on even footing with Bobby the son of a black CEO billionaire for admission who attends the $60k year prep school and has a Nobel prize winner tutoring him in math to prep for the SAT.

 

[Svnla]

<snip>
Can you tell me with a straight face that the average black kid has the same chance to get into top tier universities as the average white kid? If not, why? Are they lazier? Dumber? What? Jon Stewart showed this about as well as anyone could awhile back, it's a great clip to watch.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4u4hqr/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-bill-o-reilly

Why Asians are doing better in HS/college than blacks and hispanics, slightly behind whites? In many cases, even better than whites. Even with Asians that are not affluent. Let look at a well know school, UCLA = https://www.admission.ucla.edu/campusprofile.htm Asians are 33.5%, largest group, even larger than whites. How about UC Berkeley? Similar result = http://opa.berkeley.edu/uc-berkeley-fall-enrollment-data

Because whites only discriminate against blacks and hispanics? Or???? I always wonder about that.

 

[Exophase]

Affirmative action is supposed to speed up diversity and equality by tipping the scales in favor of those that were banished from equal protection in society for centuries. It was never meant to be a long term solution.

While completely merit based admissions is the dream some day, right now completely merit-based would favor those that are already in power. On the surface it does seem wrong to allow race-based admissions, but we must consider the enormous disadvantages that those that were subjugated for centuries still endure today.

It certainly isn't a ideal solution and I hope some day equality will be so pervasive that these policies are no longer needed. FWIW, they are a "last resort" for colleges.

I agree there's some argument for affirmative action to help lift people out of the hole that historical discrimination and oppression has put them in.

But I'd add a couple of caveats:

It must be constantly explicitly reevaluated. As you said, it's supposed to be temporary, but even if that was stated and understood at the time it's very easy for these things to become the status quo, and for the presence of the system to serve consciously or unconsciously as sufficient evidence that the system is needed. For example, there are still people today that think that women deserve preferential treatment in general admissions to universities and it needs to be demonstrated outright that no, they really don't.

Second, we have to be mindful of the fact that this isn't just about giving people resources, compensation, or privilege but putting them in positions that have an impact on society. As far as I'm concerned, the more important, higher responsibility and specialized a position is the less it should be considered for affirmative action. That, and by these points you should be far enough into the system to be able to stand on your own merit. I don't want to see affirmative admissions to medical school (or worse, graduations from medical school) leading to notably under qualified practicing doctors. The benefit to a small minority of a minority needs to be weighed against the public risk.

 

[Subyman]

Why Asians are doing better in HS/college than blacks and hispanics, slightly behind whites? In many cases, even better than whites. Even with Asians that are not affluent.

Because whites only discriminate against blacks and hispanics? Or???? I always wonder about that.

It has only been around 50 years since blacks were murdered and beaten because they were trying to register to vote. We had congressman openly calling them racial slurs on the house floor. The only jobs they could get were subservient roles. Banks gave them no credit because they didn't have a history of credit, but they couldn't ever get credit in the past. And on and on.

These things aren't in the distant past. People living today lived through that. Its hard to even imagine that today.

 

[alcoholbob]

Affirmative action is supposed to speed up diversity and equality by tipping the scales in favor of those that were banished from equal protection in society for centuries. It was never meant to be a long term solution.

While completely merit based admissions is the dream some day, right now completely merit-based would favor those that are already in power. On the surface it does seem wrong to allow race-based admissions, but we must consider the enormous disadvantages that those that were subjugated for centuries still endure today.

It certainly isn't a ideal solution and I hope some day equality will be so pervasive that these policies are no longer needed. FWIW, they are a "last resort" for colleges.

Its not a solution for anything. In Malaysia theyve had affirmative action that has preferential treatment of ethnic malays over ethnic Chinese and that has never improved the test scores of indigenous Malays. Its nothing more than a way to lower standards for certain groups, and like any good government program, is never going to end.

Also the reasons you listed for affirmative action is only valid in a country that takes little or no immigrants. In a country like the United States thats taken 80 million immigrants since 1965, something like 86% of them minorities, you cant claim its a program designed to help suppressed minorities when the vast majority benefitting from the program are new immigrants.

 

[Svnla]

It has only been around 50 years since blacks were murdered and beaten because they were trying to register to vote. We had congressman openly calling them racial slurs on the house floor. The only jobs they could get were subservient roles. Banks gave them no credit because they didn't have a history of credit, but they couldn't ever get credit in the past. And on and on.

These things aren't in the distant past. People living today lived through that. Its hard to even imagine that today.

And what is your answer to my question? Here it is again.. "Because whites only discriminate against blacks and hispanics?"

So Hispanics should do better in college than blacks if we are going to use your assertion, right? But look at the two links I posted in my previous post from UCLA and UC Berkeley, not even close.