This ruling was expected. The judge had been stalling on making a ruling to make it take time to work its way through the appeals courts and get to the Supreme Court where the policy might actually get ruled unconstitutional.
Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
51–60 of 660 posts
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#52This ruling is a travesty and I hope the Supreme Court overturns it when this is appealed. It is very clear that race-conscious admissions are systematically racist and discriminatory. Take a look at the distribution of students by race in the University of California system, where they're not permitted to discriminate in this manner, thanks to Prop 209 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_California_Proposition_20..…
Harvard has a 25%+ Asian American undergrad class, (edit)~~2.5x (Harvard's is ~60% of UC's) more than the latest number listed on that wiki page, so your final statement is factually incorrect`~.
I quoted wrong number. It's 25% vs 40%.
https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/admissions-statistics
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#53Wow - this sets a bad precedent. This might now encourage companies to now discriminate against Asias in hiring as well. There are already murmurs in the Valley about how there are too many Asians in tech.
Why do you think that? Discriminating by race for hiring is explicitly illegal, so wherever it's happening, it's already happening despite the law.
No it isn’t. Affirmative action programs in employment are legal.
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#54For perspective, here are the Harvard vs US demographics, sorted by most to least represented [1,2,3,4]: Jewish: 14.0% vs 2.6% (5.38x) Asian American: 25.3% vs 5.3% (4.77x) Native Hawaiian: 0.6% vs 0.2% (3.00x) Native American: 1.8% vs 0.7% (2.57x) African American: 14.3% vs 12.7% (1.13x) Hispanic or Latino: 12.2% vs 17.6% (0.69x) non-Jewish white: 33.0% vs 58.9% (0.56x) [1] https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/adm…
So the single percentage point difference in the african american demo is what people are going nuts about ?
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#55For perspective, here are the Harvard vs US demographics, sorted by most to least represented [1,2,3,4]: Jewish: 14.0% vs 2.6% (5.38x) Asian American: 25.3% vs 5.3% (4.77x) Native Hawaiian: 0.6% vs 0.2% (3.00x) Native American: 1.8% vs 0.7% (2.57x) African American: 14.3% vs 12.7% (1.13x) Hispanic or Latino: 12.2% vs 17.6% (0.69x) non-Jewish white: 33.0% vs 58.9% (0.56x) [1] https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/adm…
As usual, white people are the real victims of modern discrimination, while being scapegoated by the minorities who benefit.
Welcome to woke!
See my other comment for another example of enabling racism:
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#56Unfortunately this is bigger than Harvard and the Asian American students are 'collateral damage'. Fundamentally, the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow permeates every facet of American life, education especially. You can't fix hundreds of years worth of discrimination without tipping the scales in a way that seems discriminatory to others, seems like the Judge in this case understands that.
I'm sorry, is this a judge or a legislator? I don't think their job is to "fix" anything. If the government is going to discriminate against me over my skin color I want to be able to hold them accountable at the ballot box.
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#57"Race-conscious" is a handy euphemism.
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#58They ought to do more to at least make students feel less discriminated against. The question is really how to add transparency and systemization to the process in a way that cannot be gamed. I don’t think everyone believes standardized testing is the answer, so what is it? My personal opinion is that they will actually create separate admissions pools, under the cover of the School of Engineering and Applied Science…
This is a truly hard problem. I read somewhere (citation needed) that if truly race-blind admissions were used in the UC system, they'd have 98% Asian students. (As a dead white male, that's amusing. Just shows how culture affects outcomes.)
Does this mean 98% of the students meeting guaranteed UC admission thresholds are Asian or is that something California did away with? (IE ~98% of the top 9% however that's defined I think.)
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#59The entire problem is that we categorize people into different buckets. "White", "Black", "Asian", etc. Admissions must be race blind. In general our society must be race blind. "White" people were once Polish, Italian, German, etc. Yet these identities have melted away over generations in large part because society did not and does not actively reinforce these identities. By forcing people into these buckets we rein…
There's so much to unpack here, IDK where to even start. "I don't see color" doesn't feel helpful to many people of color. If you believe that there are prejudices, and you want to fix them, saying "everyone immediately needs to stop being prejudice and everything will be better" isn't actually a solution we can enact. What if people don't suddenly decide it's in their best interest to not be racist? *Edited to remov…
It doesn't feel helpful to be viewed as an individual as opposed to simply a member of a group? Not every person with x skin color has the same experiences... You're taking racism and running the other way with it instead of just rejecting the premise of viewing people as tribe members as flawed. You shouldn't judge people by the groups they happen to belong to. Individuals should be judged on a case-by-base basis.
Re: Federal Judge Upholds Harvard's Race-Conscious Admissions Process
#60Unfortunately this is bigger than Harvard and the Asian American students are 'collateral damage'. Fundamentally, the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow permeates every facet of American life, education especially. You can't fix hundreds of years worth of discrimination without tipping the scales in a way that seems discriminatory to others, seems like the Judge in this case understands that.
Immoral and unethical nonsense.
Is it really? Think about the often used phrase in regards to subjects like this: 'equality of opportunity' vs. 'equality of outcome' think of all it would take in America to come close to equality of opportunity: you would need vast levels of education and housing reform at the minimum. That reform would no doubt 'disadvantage' those who have benefited from the discrimination and lack of access that others have dealt with. Fundamentally it looks like an institution like Harvard taking into account this context when determining admissions. This is beyond the individuals who may or may not participate in the discrimination itself because the outcome of that discrimination is everywhere now, no one can escape it.