U.S. Supreme Court Case: Fisher v. University of Texas

[DMX7]

Kagan is out, so blue team might get fucked. :(

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/10/06/4317087/high-court-may-change-ut-admission.html

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/fisher-v-university-of-texas-at-austin/

[boutons_deux]

Kagan is out, so blue team might get fucked. :(

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/10/06/4317087/high-court-may-change-ut-admission.html

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/fisher-v-university-of-texas-at-austin/

Kagan recusing probably won't make any difference. I expected affirmative action was going to lose anyway. The JINOs would say "there's no affirmative action in the Constitution or original intent".

[DMX7]

I had hopes that Roberts might surprise some people again.

[boutons_deux]

I had hopes that Roberts might surprise some people again.

SCOTUS watchers said, on his ACA ruling, that they figured he didn't want his court to be known for killing ACA, and that they expect no more surprises from Roberts, just more of the same JINO extremist crap, where institutions-trump-citizens all the time.

After all he and other JINOs are Catholic, and we know the Catholic Church, which I'm pretty sure affects their judicial thinking, protected its own institution for decades, centuries?, at the expense of minors abused by priests.

btw, there's a big scandal in NY because someone came out as being abused by a rabbi. The Jewish community has effectively destroyed the person within the Jewish community.

[Jacob1983]

Expect to see a lot of activists and hippies from minority groups get pissed if they get these handouts taken away. Personally, I will laugh and it will be an evil laugh a la Megatron G1 laugh.

[baseline bum]

LOL @ the 14th amendment applying to college admissions for whiteys but not to rights for the gays.

[Wild Cobra]

The bottom line is that those who think some classes of people need extra help, means that think they are inferior.

Quota based systems need to end. We all need to stand up for equal rights.

[ElNono]

:lmao:lmao:lmao

[baseline bum]

The bottom line is that those who think some classes of people need extra help, means that think they are inferior.


Like your mother?

[Wild Cobra]

My oh my...

What idiotic assumptions.

There simply should not be favoritism by race, sex, etc.

[Wild Cobra]

Here is an article that has some wise words:

It’s time for the Supreme Court to negate affirmative action (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/21/dont-mess-with-texas-quotas/)

A couple selections:


Conkling explained the drafters “vitalized and energized a principle as old and as everlasting as human rights … not for a few, or for a race, but for man.” Nothing in the early history of the 14th Amendment suggests it could ever be used to create preferential treatment based on race, either for college admission, hiring or noncompetitive, no-bid federal contracts.



“What is this but declaring that the law in the states shall be the same for the black as for the white; that all persons, whether colored or white, shall stand equal before the laws of the states …?” That is the same question Ms. Fisher is asking today. The high court should return the 14th Amendment to the purpose its authors intended and strike down race-based preferences.

[boutons_deux]

"race-based preferences"

like Joe Arpaio's gestapo harassing Hispanic citizens?

like NYPD, etc, stopping, and often "frying", Ms of blacks, hispanics?

[z0sa]

This is a tough one for me. OOH I don't see any real argument for affirmative action, from a logical standpoint. Race or credence or affiliation or gender shouldn't ever matter, especially on an individual vs individual basis. Yet the reality of life paints a much more ambiguous picture. Minorities need help compared to whites, it's just that simple, and I can't think of a much more effective means than a "quota" type of system.

If someone put a gun to my head I think I'd have to side with the white guy on this one, but not without many reservations and truth be told, some guilt.

[Wild Cobra]

This is a tough one for me. OOH I don't see any real argument for affirmative action, from a logical standpoint. Race or credence or affiliation or gender shouldn't ever matter, especially on an individual vs individual basis. Yet the reality of life paints a much more ambiguous picture. Minorities need help compared to whites, it's just that simple, and I can't think of a much more effective means than a "quota" type of system.

If someone put a gun to my head I think I'd have to side with the white guy on this one, but not without many reservations and truth be told, a lot of guilt.
Are you admitting to be a racist? Did you know the definition of racist is believing one race is better than another?

[z0sa]

Are you admitting to be a racist? Did you know the definition of racist is believing one race is better than another?

Such an inference is silly, as is your second question. Minorities' socioeconomic status overall, compared to whites is why I say that. Which, if you were up to date you'd know, is why this is even a debate at all. If minorities were in the exact same places as whites socioeconomically, then it would be a clean cut case.

[Wild Cobra]

Such an inference is silly, as is your second question. Minorities' socioeconomic status overall, compared to whites is why I say that. Which, if you were up to date you'd know, is why this is even a debate at all. If minorities were in the exact same places as whites socioeconomically, then it would be a clean cut case.
Let me get this strait.

You have minorities competing in the same scholastic events, and they still need help?

Seems like under such situations there is not a socioeconomic disparity. Don't forget. A very large number of whites also live in similar conditions as minorities.

Are you sure, that your form of racism, is feeling inferior? And resenting whites?

[z0sa]

Let me get this strait.

You have minorities competing in the same scholastic events, and they still need help?

Seems like under such situations there is not a socioeconomic disparity.

Are you sure, that your form of racism, is feeling inferior? And resenting whites?

Strait? As in George Strait?

Minorities consistently score lower across the board on IQ tests and in scoring averages overall. They are poorer than whites, sometimes much poorer. Their overall wealth is much lower.

Despite these facts I'm still on "your" side. There's not much an argument for affirmative action, logically speaking. But whites are much more well off than minorities, over all. I think that will change and even out regardless of affirmative action within the next 50-100 years.

And if you want to imply how I think or feel, feel free. I couldn't care less.

[Wild Cobra]

So taking what amounts to racist action against whites is the solution?

[FromWayDowntown]

All whites colleges will be amazing places.

[Wild Cobra]

All whites colleges will be amazing places.
Do you really believe blacks and other minorities cannot compete on a level playing field?

[FromWayDowntown]

Do you really believe blacks and other minorities cannot compete on a level playing field?

Of course not.

But I also don't live in a fantasy land where the secondary education available in economically downtrodden areas is equal to the educational opportunities available in more affluent areas.

I agree with you, in principle, that race shouldn't be a significant factor in college admissions. But I do think that colleges should take into consideration the socio-economic circumstances from which applicants come and weigh that as part of the admission criteria. If the question is always -- and only -- whether Student A has better grades and test scores than Student B, there's an extremely high probability that only those who are able to avail themselves of the educational opportunities that affluence can afford will be admitted to colleges.

[Wild Cobra]

Of course not.

But I also don't live in a fantasy land where the secondary education available in economically downtrodden areas is equal to the educational opportunities available in more affluent areas.

I agree with you, in principle, that race shouldn't be a significant factor in college admissions. But I do think that colleges should take into consideration the socio-economic circumstances from which applicants come and weigh that as part of the admission criteria. If the question is always -- and only -- whether Student A has better grades and test scores than Student B, there's an extremely high probability that only those who are able to avail themselves of the educational opportunities that affluence can afford will be admitted to colleges.
When the scholastic criteria is equal, I don't have a problem with selecting by some other criteria as a tie breaker. In this case, the college admitted less qualified minorities over a better qualified white student. Punishing a person because of their race.

[boutons_deux]

"Punishing a person because of their race"

.... whites to blacks, "400 Years"

[Wild Cobra]

"Punishing a person because of their race"

.... whites to blacks, "400 Years"



Are you suggesting that two wrongs make a right? Three lefts do, but two wrongs do not.

[FromWayDowntown]

The necessary consequence of allowing that consideration to only be a tiebreaker is that you ensure that kids from better scholastic backgrounds -- from areas of greater affluence -- will be preferred in collegiate admissions. Even if you take test scores out of the equation, a kid with an A average from a terrific school isn't scholastically equal to a kid with an A average from a school in a less affluent area; the A average in the better school is (or will likely be deemed) scholastically superior to the kid with A average in the mediocre or poor school. If your sole criteria is a blind look at grades and test scores, poor kids -- particularly in Texas, where school funding isn't equalized -- won't be going to good colleges unless they are absolutely exceptional.

[Wild Cobra]

Are the SAT's different by school?

I think not.

As for the grades in a school. It's probably easier to get a higher grade point average in a lesser schools than it is better schools, where the parents demand higher levels of teaching.

[FromWayDowntown]

Are the SAT's different by school?

I think not.

You're right. Kids from bad schools usually kick ass on the SAT.


As for the grades in a school. It's probably easier to get a higher grade point average in a lesser schools than it is better schools, where the parents demand higher levels of teaching.

Of course. That's precisely the point. And if you choose to make that your primary (and, perhaps, only) criteria for college admissions, the kids in colleges are going to be kids from affluent schools. The system will invariably perpetuate itself.

[Wild Cobra]

As for the grades in a school. It's probably easier to get a higher grade point average in a lesser schools than it is better schools, where the parents demand higher levels of teaching.

[FromWayDowntown]

Again, that's exactly the point. In the world that you propose, nobody in a college admissions office could (or should) consider an A average from a poor school to be the academic equivalent of an A average from a good school. And, ultimately, if your admission criteria consider grades and test scores, the likelihood is that the kid with the A average from the poor school will -- as things are normalized by national testing -- have poorer test scores than the kid with a slightly lower average from a much better school.

What then?

Too bad, so sad that you grew up in a bad neighborhood?

[Wild Cobra]

We simply disagree with what is right. Even if you are right, you need to determine by factors that are not race based.

Again, there are several whites who also have poor socioeconomic conditions.

How can we ever get rid of racism when people like you keep fanning the flames?

[CosmicCowboy]

If you look at Texas's top 10% automatic admission that is also unfair. Take a small town school in south Texas where the graduating classes are small and the classes are full of low achieving at risk kids and it's easy to be top 10%. Compare that to a school like Reagan where they may be graduating 800 kids and the academic competition is fierce. There are probably kids in the second quarter at Reagan that would be valedictorians at Poteet.

Edit. I see FWD is addressing this point. There is no easy way to do college admissions.

It certainly doesn't seem fair that an academically superior student would end up having to go to a second tier college when less able students get auto admitted to UT, A&M, Tech etc.

[FromWayDowntown]

We simply disagree with what is right. Even if you are right, you need to determine by factors that are not race based.

Again, there are several whites who also have poor socioeconomic conditions.

How can we ever get rid of racism when people like you keep fanning the flames?

Where in my posts did I mention race?

Go ahead, tell me all about your assumptions.

My argument relates to impoverished socio-economic conditions. As you've said repeatedly, those conditions exist in non-minority communities. My argument has only to do with taking those conditions into account in the admissions process, not to taking race into consideration. You're the one interjecting race here.

[FromWayDowntown]

Edit. I see FWD is addressing this point. There is no easy way to do college admissions.

It certainly doesn't seem fair that an academically superior student would end up having to go to a second tier college when less able students get auto admitted to UT, A&M, Tech etc.

Sure. At the same time, it seems unfair that a student who excels despite a bad environment but who might be not quite as academically advanced as a student who does well in a great environment should lose the opportunity to attend a top-tier school just because he or she grew up in the wrong place.

I'd agree, by and large, with your point here if Texas required equal funding for its public schools, but with our provincial system, making college admission decisions based solely upon academic bona fides (with no consideration of external, socio-economic factors) seems a guarantee to populate top-tier colleges almost exclusively with kids from affluent backgrounds.

[Agloco]

We simply disagree with what is right. Even if you are right, you need to determine by factors that are not race based.

Again, there are several whites who also have poor socioeconomic conditions.

How can we ever get rid of racism when people like you keep fanning the flames?


Where in my posts did I mention race?

Go ahead, tell me all about your assumptions.

My argument relates to impoverished socio-economic conditions. As you've said repeatedly, those conditions exist in non-minority communities. My argument has only to do with taking those conditions into account in the admissions process, not to taking race into consideration. You're the one interjecting race here.

:corn:

[ploto]

It certainly doesn't seem fair that an academically superior student would end up having to go to a second tier college when less able students get auto admitted to UT, A&M, Tech etc.

Who is to say how those 2 students would have done had they attended each others' high schools.

[ploto]

...better schools, where the parents demand higher levels of teaching.

Or where the parents demand higher grades?

[DMX7]

If you look at Texas's top 10% automatic admission that is also unfair. Take a small town school in south Texas where the graduating classes are small and the classes are full of low achieving at risk kids and it's easy to be top 10%. Compare that to a school like Reagan where they may be graduating 800 kids and the academic competition is fierce. There are probably kids in the second quarter at Reagan that would be valedictorians at Poteet.

Edit. I see FWD is addressing this point. There is no easy way to do college admissions.

It certainly doesn't seem fair that an academically superior student would end up having to go to a second tier college when less able students get auto admitted to UT, A&M, Tech etc.

Let's be honest, the only public universities in Texas with strict admissions requirements are UT-Austin, UT-Dallas and Texas A&M.

But here's the thing: UT-Austin has a CAP program that let's students who didn't get admitted go to a UT System school and then transfer after just one year if their grades are decent. This girl could have gone that route, but she clearly just wanted to be a drama queen and destroy affirmative action.

[DMX7]

This is a tough one for me. OOH I don't see any real argument for affirmative action, from a logical standpoint. Race or credence or affiliation or gender shouldn't ever matter, especially on an individual vs individual basis. Yet the reality of life paints a much more ambiguous picture. Minorities need help compared to whites, it's just that simple, and I can't think of a much more effective means than a "quota" type of system.

If someone put a gun to my head I think I'd have to side with the white guy on this one, but not without many reservations and truth be told, some guilt.

The Ivy League schools, in their Amicus Curiae in support of UT, make a good case for diversity and holistic admissions. UT also has a holistic admissions process for its non-top 10% admits.


Thus, in addition to seeking students who are qualified, each institution also looks to compose a student body that is exceptional, complementary, and diverse in many ways. In service of this goal, each institution seeks, and invites applicants to submit, any relevant information about their experiences, accomplishments, and background to understand how the applicant might contribute to the vibrancy of the student body. The individualized, holistic review processes em- ployed by Amici are not ways of ranking candidates from “strong” to “weak” but instead means to assemble an exceptional undergraduate community that exposes students to differences of many kinds: backgrounds, ideas, experiences, talents, and aspirations.

Amici’s admissions policies are based on the principle that, in a free society, inquiry proceeds best when views and goals must withstand examination from the widest possible range of perspectives. And Amici’s experiences bear this out: A student body that is diverse in many dimensions, including racial and ethnic background, produces enormous educational benefits. Such diversity significantly improves the rigor and quality of students’ educational experiences by leading them to examine and confront themselves and their tenets from many different points of view. It also prepares them for life, work, and leadership in a nation and world that are constantly becoming more complex.

This diversity benefits society as well, for it fosters the development of citizens and leaders who are creative, collaborative, and able to navigate deftly in dynamic, diverse environments. Indeed, the university plays a unique and critical role in this respect, for in our society a university educational experience may offer one of the few opportunities for individuals to live and interact on a daily basis with peers from markedly dif- ferent backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives.

[FromWayDowntown]

The pluralism of the Ivy League schools is part of what makes that experience holistically educational. The classroom teaching there is obviously exceptional, but the exposure to so many different people -- and so many different kinds of people -- is a daily education that no book or teacher can provide.

[Wild Cobra]

Where in my posts did I mention race?

My apologies.

You came in as z0sa and I were discussing race.

[Jacob1983]

Affirmative action is straight up racist and disciminatory against everyone. It goes with the logic that anyone that belongs to a minority group is too weak and helpless and cannot achieve success on their because they belong to a minority group. So with that strike against them, they need a helping hand since they are not smart and independent to achieve success on their own. It also goes with the logic that all white people are powerful and never need any help at all because they're white and have had everything handed to them on a silver platter.

Affirmative action does not really help minorities. It tells them that they are stupid, weak, and powerless because they're a minority and they need help from white people to be winners in America. Where is the tolerance in that?

[Wild Cobra]

Jacob...

I agree with you except for one thing. Not all affirmative action is quota or favoritism based. The original intent of affirmative action was good. It is what it has changed into that is bad.

[Jacob1983]

It's bad because you're telling certain people that are helpless and stupid because of their skin color and that they need a helping hand from white people. It's bullshit. You're basically writing them off and saying that there is no way that they can make it on their own.

[Wild Cobra]

It's bad because you're telling certain people that are helpless and stupid because of their skin color and that they need a helping hand from white people. It's bullshit. You're basically writing them off and saying that there is no way that they can make it on their own.
Yes, most types of affirmative action are bad in that way. Affirmative action originated as a program to make sure minorities knew where opportunities were available. That was the limit of the help, originally.

[DarrinS]

Affirmative action is a great thing. You can get into Stanford with a 1200 SAT and go on to become mayor of San Antonio.

A score of 1200 is not a bad score, it's just not Stanford material.

[The Reckoning]

CAP program is great, but what people dont mention is that it only limits students to the school of natural sciences and liberal arts. if you want to be enrolled in a decent UT program, you have to apply separately, and for the most part it's impossible to get in (unless you're applying to com school lol).

[DarrinS]

If AA were eliminated, is there any doubt that certain minorities, i.e. Indian, Asian, etc. would not be well represented?

[DMX7]

It's bad because you're telling certain people that are helpless and stupid because of their skin color and that they need a helping hand from white people. It's bullshit. You're basically writing them off and saying that there is no way that they can make it on their own.

Apparently they can't make it without AA. See post below.

[DMX7]

If AA were eliminated, is there any doubt that certain minorities, i.e. Indian, Asian, etc. would not be well represented?

I don't know about Indians, but Asians are dominating the UCLA campus now that AA been banned there.

Here's some more interesting info:


The campuses that have seen the biggest declines in African-American and Latino enrollment in the wake of affirmative-action bans have been UCLA and UC Berkeley – prestigious public schools that compete for students with private colleges that have been free to continue to use race as a factor in admissions.

At UC Berkeley, for example, African-American enrollment ranged between 6 and 7 percent before the voter initiative that banned affirmative action in California in 1996. It then dwindled to between 3 and 4 percent, and in 2010, despite continued attempts to create alternative routes to diversity, it was only 2 percent. Hispanic enrollment also dipped, from about 14 percent before to about 11 percent.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2012/1009/Supreme-Court-If-affirmative-action-is-banned-what-happens-at-colleges

[ploto]

A system that acknowledges that some people are born with a head start and that others have actually achieved far more given where they began is a good one in my opinion.

[Jacob1983]

So stereotyping minorities as stupid, helpless, and dependent on government is okay and justified?

[ElNono]

So stereotyping minorities as stupid, helpless, and dependent on government is okay and justified?

How do you figure?

I thought FWD put it succinctly enough: this isn't about race, it's about socioeconomic conditions. It just so happens that those in minorities largely are at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder.

[DarrinS]

I don't know about Indians, but Asians are dominating the UCLA campus now that AA been banned there.

Here's some more interesting info:



http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2012/1009/Supreme-Court-If-affirmative-action-is-banned-what-happens-at-colleges


And?


If Asian students are outperforming other students, so be it. Unless you think that Asian students come from some "privaledged" background that gives them an unfair advantage. Lol.

[boutons_deux]

from questioning in SCOTUS today, sounds like the JINOs are gonna kill affirmative action.

[Juggity]

:lmao white persecution complex

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court justices skeptical of affirmative action for college


http://touch.latimes.com/#section/407/article/p2p-72826423/

[DMX7]

And?


If Asian students are outperforming other students, so be it. Unless you think that Asian students come from some "privaledged" background that gives them an unfair advantage. Lol.

The Asians have a great work ethic, but they are certainly not coming from the background of blacks/hispanics. Generally speaking, they are more privileged. Many of the asians are also international students, especially from China which means they're likely to be only children and their parents are likely to be affluent enough to pay for their school and test prep... in addition to being affluent enough to send their child oversees to go to school.

But you're deliberately missing my point anyway...

[Wild Cobra]

they are certainly not coming from the background of blacks/hispanics
I'm getting pretty tired of this cop-out.

[DMX7]

I'm getting pretty tired of this cop-out.

So why aren't underrepresented minorities making it on their own without AA or some other form of it? Are they just lazy/dumb?

[Wild Cobra]

So why aren't underrepresented minorities making it on their own without AA or some other form of it? Are they just lazy/dumb?
Are you saying it doesn't happen?

What evidence do you have?

[DarrinS]

The Asians have a great work ethic, but they are certainly not coming from the background of blacks/hispanics. Generally speaking, they are more privileged. Many of the asians are also international students, especially from China which means they're likely to be only children and their parents are likely to be affluent enough to pay for their school and test prep... in addition to being affluent enough to send their child oversees to go to school.

But you're deliberately missing my point anyway...



If the Asian kid lives in the same neighborhood and goes to the same school, are they more affluent?

[Yonivore]

I'm with Justice Roberts on this one; the best way to end racial discrimination is to end racial discrimination.

[LnGrrrR]

If you look at Texas's top 10% automatic admission that is also unfair. Take a small town school in south Texas where the graduating classes are small and the classes are full of low achieving at risk kids and it's easy to be top 10%. Compare that to a school like Reagan where they may be graduating 800 kids and the academic competition is fierce. There are probably kids in the second quarter at Reagan that would be valedictorians at Poteet.

Edit. I see FWD is addressing this point. There is no easy way to do college admissions.

It certainly doesn't seem fair that an academically superior student would end up having to go to a second tier college when less able students get auto admitted to UT, A&M, Tech etc.

You could argue that it's "fair" in the sense that people voted in people to make those laws. :stirpot:

[DMX7]

Are you saying it doesn't happen?

What evidence do you have?

My previous reference to what happened at UCLA when AA was eliminated.

[DMX7]

We win!!!

http://www.utexas.edu/know/2013/06/24/supreme-court-fisher-ut-austin/

Supreme Court punted! Blue team wins again! If an actual decision had been reached, we would have most certainly lost. Now, however, the case goes back to the appellate court where UT will kick ass and win again.

In yo face!

[DMX7]

If the Asian kid lives in the same neighborhood and goes to the same school, are they more affluent?

Just noticed this comment, but I will dignify your stupid question with a rhetorical question. How many asians do you see living in the neighborhoods of blacks/hispanics?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

lol tiny wedge issues like affirmative action fake liberals focus on

[DMX7]

lol tiny wedge issues like affirmative action fake liberals focus on

Nah, it's an actual policy issue -- especially important here in Texas with the number of minorities.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Nah, it's an actual policy issue -- especially important here in Texas with the number of minorities.

It's an issue like gay marriage that Obama uses to distract liberals from his track record on economic and foreign policy. Granted, both sides of the aisle use it as a wedge issue. It's an effective tool for Republicans to convince poor white people other minorities are why their lives suck.

[Wild Cobra]

So.

The supreme court supports racism. The belief that minorities need help because they can't compete on a level playing field is racism...

[Capt Bringdown]

http://blu.stb.s-msn.com/i/BA/E0D504975537F5ADB7D3535DBDA7_h316_w628_m5_cSnhpYbz e.jpg

[DMX7]

So.

The supreme court supports racism. The belief that minorities need help because they can't compete on a level playing field is racism...

The playing field is not level without affirmative action -- even then it's fair from perfect.

[angrydude]

So.

The supreme court supports racism. The belief that minorities need help because they can't compete on a level playing field is racism...

They overturned a big part of the voting rights act today. lol.

[boutons_deux]

the VRA gutting is much more important to VRWC SCOTUS than affirmative action, because of its electoral impact in aiding gerrymandering, voter suppression, etc, esp in purple states. Won't help much in red states, they're fucked up red already.

[DMX7]

I can't believe it's been two whole years since it was ruled on.

Sadly, it's going back to the Supreme Court and this time AA may go down.

[baseline bum]

I don't know about Indians, but Asians are dominating the UCLA campus now that AA been banned there.

Here's some more interesting info:



http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2012/1009/Supreme-Court-If-affirmative-action-is-banned-what-happens-at-colleges

Asians dominated UCLA way before that.

[DMX7]

Asians dominated UCLA way before that.

At UCLA? UC-Berkeley is different, but I don't think there were as many Asians at UCLA.

[baseline bum]

At UCLA? UC-Berkeley is different, but I don't think there were as many Asians at UCLA.

Yes, UCLA was full of Asian Americans long before this.

[DMX7]

Yes, UCLA was full of Asian Americans long before this.

At the same rate?

[baseline bum]

At the same rate?

At the rate their numbers dominated most of my classes there.

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS to reconsider:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/01/us/politics/colleges-brace-for-supreme-court-review-of-admissions.html?ref=topics

[DMX7]

-

[Winehole23]

Neither special circumstances nor grades were determinative. Of the 841 students admitted under these criteria, 47 had worse grades than Fisher, and 42 of them were white. On the other end, UT rejected 168 black and Latino students with scores equal to or better than Fisher’s.



To call this discrimination is to say that Fisher was entitled to a space at the UT Austin, despite grades that didn’t make the cut. It’s worth pointing out that the university gave her the choice of transferring from a satellite school, which she rejected.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/06/fisher_v_university_of_texas_the_supreme_court_mig ht_just_gut_affirmative.html

[boutons_deux]

She and other applicants who did not make the cut were evaluated based on two scores (http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/app/briefs/fisher_appellee_brief.pdf).

One allotted points for grades and test scores. The other, called a personal achievement index, awarded points for two required essays, leadership, activities, service and "special circumstances." Those included socioeconomic status of the student or the student's school, coming from a home with a single parent or one where English wasn't spoken. And race.

Those two scores, combined, determine admission.

Even among those students, Fisher did not particularly stand out. Court records show (http://www.utexas.edu/vp/irla/Documents/Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf) her grade point average (3.59) and SAT scores (1180 out of 1600) were good but not great for the highly selective flagship university (http://www.parchment.com/c/college/college-1572-University-of-Texas-at-Austin.html).

The school's rejection rate that year for the remaining 841 openings was higher than the turn-down rate for students trying to get into Harvard.

As a result, university officials claim in court filings that even if Fisher received points for her race and every other personal achievement factor, the letter she received in the mail still would have said no.

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. (http://www.utexas.edu/vp/irla/Documents/Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf) Forty-two were white. (http://www.utexas.edu/vp/irla/Documents/Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf)

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.

In an interview last month, Blum agreed Fisher's credentials and circumstances make it difficult to argue — as he and his supporters have so ardently in public — that but for her race Fisher would have been a Longhorn.

"There are some Anglo students who had lower grades than Abby who were admitted also," Blum told ProPublica. "Litigation like this is not a black and white paradigm."
Blum started his one-man nonprofit, the Project on Fair Representation (http://www.projectonfairrepresentation.org/), in 2005. The organization is funded by deep-pocketed conservatives to, according to its website, influence "jurisprudence, public policy, and public attitudes regarding race and ethnicity" in voting, education, contracting and employment. To do so, Blum — who is not a lawyer — helps arrange pro bono representation to fight race-based policies that were meant to address inequalities.

According to a Reuters profile (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/04/us-usa-court-casemaker-idUSBRE8B30V220121204), Blum has brought at least a dozen lawsuits against such programs and laws — including four that made it to the Supreme Court. He has two on the current docket, Fisher and the Shelby County, Ala., case challenging a key provision of the Voting Rights Act (http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shelby-county-v-holder/).

In the Fisher case, while the young woman may have lent her name to the lawsuit, the case before the Court has very little to do with her. Her name appears just five times in the thousands of words that make up the body of the complaint. She has already gone on to graduate from Louisiana State University, her second choice, and is working in finance at a firm in Austin.

Asked by a news reporter what harm she had suffered, she cited only her inability to tap into UT's alumni network and possibly missing out on a better first job. If she wins, Fisher seeks only the return of her application fee and housing deposit — a grand total of $100 in damages.

So while the Fisher case has been billed as a referendum on affirmative action, its backers have significantly grander ambitions: They seek to make the case a referendum on the 14th Amendment itself (http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/14thamendment.html). At issue is whether the Constitution's equal protection clause, drafted by Congress during Reconstruction (http://www.howard.edu/library/reference/guides/reconstructionera/default.htm) to ensure the rights of black Americans, also prohibits the use of race to help them overcome the nation's legacy of racism.

The Supreme Court has never ruled that the Constitution bars any and all laws and government programs that consider race. But Blum and his supporters, seeing an opening with the current Court, seek to overturn more than a century of precedent.

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/what-abigail-fishers-affirmative-action-case-is-really-about/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

So like the King V Burwell, the Fisher case is total and complete BULLSHIT, financed by RACIST WHITE REPUG CONSERVATIVES to overturn 100 years of precedent in the name of comparatively mediocre student Fisher.

[boutons_deux]

btw, Blum of Maine has is oppressed, distressed, repulsed by the high number of blacks in Maine: 1.4%

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/23000.html