Discrimination is fine and dandy as long as the right race(s) are being discriminated against.

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/01...d-in-admissions-case

Federal Judge Rules In Favor Of Harvard In Admissions Case

A judge has ruled in favor of Harvard University in a high–profile court case centered on Harvard's consideration of race in admissions.

Federal District Court Judge Allison D. Burroughs issued her decision Tuesday, saying, "Harvard's admission program passes constitutional muster," and that "ensuring diversity at Harvard relies, in part, on race conscious admissions."

The plaintiff, advocacy group Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), accused Harvard of discriminating against Asian-American applicants. It argued the school considers race too much, forcing Asian-Americans to meet a higher bar to get in.

In a statement, SFFA President Edward Blum said, "Students for Fair Admissions is disappointed that the court has upheld Harvard's discriminatory admissions policies." He also said, "SFFA will appeal this decision to the First Court of Appeals and, if necessary, to the U.S Supreme Court."

Supporters of affirmative action fear that if this case makes it to the nation's highest court, race-conscious admissions could be eliminated.

"This has been kind of a beacon of civil rights policies in higher education that helped to transform student demographics, especially at elite institutions," said Mitchell Chang, an education professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Education law professor Liliana Garces co–authored an amicus brief supporting Harvard's admissions practices leading up to the trial.

"I think what this case represents is a very concerted effort to bring the question of race-conscious admissions back to the Supreme Court," said Garces, who teaches at the University of Texas at Austin.

SFFA, led by conservative strategist Edward Blum, sued Harvard back in 2014, alleging that the school discriminates against Asian–American applicants in the admissions process. The organization says Harvard uses "racial balancing" — which is illegal — to curate its student body and holds Asian–American students to a higher standard than others in the admissions process. (Blum was also behind a lawsuit against the University of Texas at Austin, challenging its affirmative action program. The Supreme Court sided with the University of Texas in 2016.)

Harvard denied the group's claims of discrimination, presenting its own evidence to the contrary during a three-week trial in fall 2018. Harvard said uses what it calls a "whole person review" in its admissions process, considering many qualities about each candidate. Testimony from Harvard representatives, including the admissions dean, provided a window into the school's normally mysterious admissions system.

Harvard only accepts a small percentage of its applicants, but most American colleges and universities accept a majority of those who apply. And while Harvard is among a large group of selective schools that consider race as one factor in admissions, most schools don't take race into account.

The story i read also indicates UNC Chapel Hill is facing a similar lawsuit.

I'm hoping RBG retires soon so Trump can get another conservative on the court and we don't have to read another opinion from Roberts telling us why something that is obviously unconstitutional is in fact totes cool because the reputation of the Court on the Left is paramount

I'm a little confused over this whole Harvard discrimination thing. I worked there for 31 years and I can attest that Asians made up a large portion of the student body. Just maybe, if going strictly by qualifications to accept, it would lead to a great imbalance with Asians being the majority. As a devil's advocate I'd say that Harvard might just be trying to keep a balance. Of course, it would still need to have seats for wealthy alum's kids and grandkids.

quote:

Originally posted by yanici:
I'm a little confused over this whole Harvard discrimination thing. I worked there for 31 years and I can attest that Asians made up a large portion of the student body.

Interestingly enough, our Fox station here in Denver is related to CNN and I cannot find the post on Fox31 denver. However, I googled it and found it on Fox 13 out of Memphis.

It says:

quote:

A 2013 internal report at Harvard found that if the school weighed applicants on academics alone, 43% of the admitted class would be Asian American, while in reality, it was 19%. But Harvard said the report was only meant to be "exploratory" and was based on incomplete data.

Source: Federal judge upholds affirmative action at Harvard - Fox13 Memphis

quote:

Originally posted by yanici:
As a devil's advocate I'd say that Harvard might just be trying to keep a balance.

As if that should have one goddamn thing to do with being admitted. 1,200 seats available, the top 1,200 students get them. Who gives a damn what skin tone or gender they are. Ya wanna make America great again, then totally scrap affirmative action across the board.

I understand the arguments about balance, diversity, etc. but I think they overlook an important point: One of the fundamental principles underlying our country (and western democracy) is the idea that every person has inviolable rights which are not contingent on membership in some group. Every individual matters more than any group. These affirmative action cases have some pragmatic appeal at the group level but at the individual level, where rights exist, there is something fundamentally wrong with telling a kid who worked their behind off that they are not welcome at your university for no other reason than they belong to a certain racial group.

Dear Asians,

Go ahead and continue to vote for dems while they fuck you. Asians are just like the Jews when it comes to voting. I don't understand it. dems hate Israel yet Jews continue to vote left.

I'm not sure "Asians" are a Democrat voting bloc. I think Koreans are at least split. Same with Indians.

Regarding Jews, they identify much more strongly as "liberal" than as "Jewish." Their political affiliation is much stronger than their ethnic or religious affiliation.

quote:

Originally posted by yanici:
I'm a little confused over this whole Harvard discrimination thing. I worked there for 31 years and I can attest that Asians made up a large portion of the student body. Just maybe, if going strictly by qualifications to accept, it would lead to a great imbalance with Asians being the majority. As a devil's advocate I'd say that Harvard might just be trying to keep a balance. Of course, it would still need to have seats for wealthy alum's kids and grandkids.

That is exactly what Harvard is saying.

The question is whether that is valid, or whether they must be strictly race-neutral, totally blind to race.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

Originally posted by yanici:
As a devil's advocate I'd say that Harvard might just be trying to keep a balance.

As if that should have one goddamn thing to do with being admitted. 1,200 seats available, the top 1,200 students get them. Who gives a damn what skin tone or gender they are. Ya wanna make America great again, then totally scrap affirmative action across the board.

All that "affirmative action" nonsense was, was a program to force unqualified, or marginally qualified into positions.

I was a manager at IBM during some this BS. Saw it in action. Had one minority female who destroyed millions of dollars worth of micro-chips and she did it intentionally! It became a battle between management and "personnel".

Her first line manager presented the issue to all the managers in that operation and wondered what to do. He had tried to fire her and "personnel" told him he could not.

My suggestion was to tell personnel that he had fired her and if they wanted to keep her as an employee they should simply transfer her to personnel.

She was gone that day.

Sometimes all it takes if for an individual to stand up, take the high road and force the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by yanici:
I'm a little confused over this whole Harvard discrimination thing. I worked there for 31 years and I can attest that Asians made up a large portion of the student body. Just maybe, if going strictly by qualifications to accept, it would lead to a great imbalance with Asians being the majority. As a devil's advocate I'd say that Harvard might just be trying to keep a balance. Of course, it would still need to have seats for wealthy alum's kids and grandkids.

That is exactly what Harvard is saying.

The question is whether that is valid, or whether they must be strictly race-neutral, totally blind to race.

What ever happened to the concept of those best qualified getting the job, student slot, etc?

Anything else is simply PC pandering.

quote:

Federal District Court Judge Allison D. Burroughs

Burroughs, Allison D. Born 1961 in Boston, MA. Federal Judicial Service. Judge, U. S. District Court, District of Massachusetts. Nominated by Barack Obama

Not a surprising ruling based on the Judges appointee, if she follows the mantra of appointed by a D, rule accordingly....

I urge anyone who knows better to correct me, but after years of paying some attention to the question, it seems to me there are two primary reasons why American Jews don’t care much about Democrats’ attitudes and policies toward Israel.

The first, as many people have pointed out, is that most Jews are Jewish in ancestry only, not in religious belief and practice. I have a Scottish name and am interested in aspects of my Scottish background, but I don’t really care if Scotland separates itself from the UK, whether Scottish currency is accepted in England, or even if the country goes the way of the rest of self-emasculated Europe with its social and political policies and practices. I suspect that’s true of other groups in this country.

What’s most important to people who don’t care about the “old country” (not that that’s strictly applicable to Israel that hasn’t even been in existence long enough to be old), is acceptance by their neighbors, co-workers, and others in their social circles. And that can be especially true of people who were ostracized in the past, and sometimes still are today. During America’s involvement in World War I, and to a lesser extend in WW II, Americans of German heritage had to be very careful to make it clear that their allegiance was to the U.S., not to Germany.

The second major reason is probably not very well understood by many/most non-Jews because it is for the opposite, religious belief reason. There is strong opposition to the idea of an independent Jewish state (Israel) among fundamentalist Jews because it wasn’t established by the Messiah; i.e., the country shouldn’t even exist in their view. As I pointed out in another thread, the supreme irony is that there are orthodox Jews in Israel who avoid conscription into the defense forces and reject the nation’s existence on religious grounds while being supported by national welfare. If there are Jews living in Israel who believe the country is an illegitimate entity, how more likely is it that American Jews will think the same?