Supreme Court rejects affirmative action in ruling on universities using race in admissions decisions

RoseRed

American Beauty
PREMO Member
:clap:

The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a major ruling on affirmative action Tuesday, rejecting the use of race as a factor in college admissions as a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

Many universities have argued that race-based admissions ensures that student bodies remain diverse, while critics such as the plaintiffs in the cases argue the policy discriminates against many qualified students based on race.

 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
It also discriminates against other races, such as Asians, Middle Eaterners and Indians (whom I realize are also Asians, but not always thought of that way), who tend to be exceptional students.

My sentiment about affirmative action is that after nearly sixty years - if it isn't accomplishing its goal, it probaly won't. Any program with an actual eventual defined goal MUST HAVE some kind of metric to determine if it has achieved or made progress towards it - and must have the ability to adjust and self-correct to get there.

The premise was to tilt the outcome in hopes that it would become self-sustaining. Have highly educated minority students who would in turn by virtue of their success - bring about change to their families and so forth. Well it didn't happen. The problem with minority admissions isn't discrimination - it's that schools they go to are poor, teachers IN those schools aren't trained enough, the environments they are in are - troubled - and the world many of them grow up in isn't conducive to academic success.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
It also discriminates against other races, such as Asians, Middle Eaterners and Indians (whom I realize are also Asians, but not always thought of that way), who tend to be exceptional students.

My sentiment about affirmative action is that after nearly sixty years - if it isn't accomplishing its goal, it probaly won't. Any program with an actual eventual defined goal MUST HAVE some kind of metric to determine if it has achieved or made progress towards it - and must have the ability to adjust and self-correct to get there.

The premise was to tilt the outcome in hopes that it would become self-sustaining. Have highly educated minority students who would in turn by virtue of their success - bring about change to their families and so forth. Well it didn't happen. The problem with minority admissions isn't discrimination - it's that schools they go to are poor, teachers IN those schools aren't trained enough, the environments they are in are - troubled - and the world many of them grow up in isn't conducive to academic success.
I'm going to agree with you, but not in the order you have. I think the #1 problem is the environment, the kids are broken before they ever start going to school. It's why they think that the answer to every problem is violence. This keeps the good teachers from wanting to work in these schools, after all who wants to go to work to get beaten by a twelve year old. It also means no matter how much money they throw at the problem it will never get better, the worst school districts get the most money per student and it's wasted. There's got to be a better way, but short of putting down the feral people I don't see it.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I'm going to agree with you, but not in the order you have. I think the #1 problem is the environment, the kids are broken before they ever start going to school. It's why they think that the answer to every problem is violence. This keeps the good teachers from wanting to work in these schools, after all who wants to go to work to get beaten by a twelve year old. It also means no matter how much money they throw at the problem it will never get better, the worst school districts get the most money per student and it's wasted. There's got to be a better way, but short of putting down the feral people I don't see it.
Then it seems like ONE of the solutions is one that prominent black Republicans have promoted, from Larry Elder to Tim Scott - restore the traditional black family, which has been torn asunder for the last sixty plus years.
 

RoseRed

American Beauty
PREMO Member
I'm going to agree with you, but not in the order you have. I think the #1 problem is the environment, the kids are broken before they ever start going to school. It's why they think that the answer to every problem is violence. This keeps the good teachers from wanting to work in these schools, after all who wants to go to work to get beaten by a twelve year old. It also means no matter how much money they throw at the problem it will never get better, the worst school districts get the most money per student and it's wasted. There's got to be a better way, but short of putting down the feral people I don't see it.
Think this will help? :rolleyes:

 

herb749

Well-Known Member
This ruling will mean nothing. Colleges will start using DEI more in selecting students. They knew AA was going out, so created something else. Asian students still lost.
 

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
Harvard To Get Around Affirmative Action Ban By Asking You Whether You Prefer BBQ, Ranch, Or Soy Sauce

 

RoseRed

American Beauty
PREMO Member
Harvard To Get Around Affirmative Action Ban By Asking You Whether You Prefer BBQ, Ranch, Or Soy Sauce

Any specific fruit?
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
All I’ve heard this afternoon has been how they were going to get around this ruling.
 

Monello

Smarter than the average bear
PREMO Member
Universities care very much about diversity. Until it comes time to pick who makes the football and basketball teams. There diversity isn't really a cherished value as much as a diverse student body.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
It also discriminates against other races, such as Asians, Middle Eaterners and Indians (whom I realize are also Asians, but not always thought of that way), who tend to be exceptional students.

My sentiment about affirmative action is that after nearly sixty years - if it isn't accomplishing its goal, it probaly won't. Any program with an actual eventual defined goal MUST HAVE some kind of metric to determine if it has achieved or made progress towards it - and must have the ability to adjust and self-correct to get there.

The premise was to tilt the outcome in hopes that it would become self-sustaining. Have highly educated minority students who would in turn by virtue of their success - bring about change to their families and so forth. Well it didn't happen. The problem with minority admissions isn't discrimination - it's that schools they go to are poor, teachers IN those schools aren't trained enough, the environments they are in are - troubled - and the world many of them grow up in isn't conducive to academic success.

I would substitute "inimical to academic success"
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I would substitute "inimical to academic success"
I think Dana Perino made a great remark on The Five - where she mentioned that
Sandra Day O’Connor said after her appointment that in 25 years - it wouldn’t be necessary. That would have been 2006. So here we are, 17 years after THAT.

I don’t know who mentioned it first - but the complaint originated with Asian students. Because they have outstanding credentials and are being discriminated against for being Asian.

SOONER or later, you have to fix the problem where it starts. By altering admissions, it’s been observed that a huge portion of admittees - don’t complete their degree. You’re doing no one favors by admitting on the basis of race if they can’t do the work.

It CAN be helped if you examine cases for admission with a bias without regard to ability to pay. Admitting someone who can’t compete is depriving a good student who can.
 

BOP

Well-Known Member
I gave up googling, trying to find a non-LSM site for this story. I did see that lefties have thoughts. They're wrong, but they are thoughts.

And yes, she said the part you're not supposed to say, out loud.

lefties have thoughts.jpg
 
Top