General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSupreme Court justices skeptical of affirmative action for college
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-supreme-court-affirmative-action-20121010,0,6849950.storySupreme Court justices skeptical of affirmative action for college
By David G. Savage
...In his opening question, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. noted that applicants to the University of Texas applicants must check a box to certify their race or ethnicity.
Roberts asked whether a student would qualify as a minority if he were one-fourth Latino. When the attorney for Texas said the student could decide for himself, Roberts asked: How about one-eighth? The chief justice made clear throughout the argument that he is troubled by the use of race as a deciding factor in public policies.
Alito said he was surprised to learn that the Texas university seeks black and Latino students who grew up in affluent families with professional parents. Alito said he assumed affirmative action was designed to give a preference to students from “underprivileged backgrounds,” not for minority students from wealthy families.
He was referring to a passage in the University of Texas brief which said the university may wish to give a preference to a black student with professional parents and from a good Dallas-area high school over a black or Latino student who earned top grades at an “overwhelmingly” black or Latino high school. ...
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Discrimination is discrimination regardless of whom it is applied to.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)being a remedial action to address about a century and a half of discrimination. Huh?
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)In the end, it comes down to one person missing out on an opportunity to which he or she was entitled simply because of their ethnicity. It wasn't right when it happened to black people and it's just as wrong to do it to some other ethnic group. Calling it remediation is just rationalizing the wrong.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that (almost) never happens in the real world.
There is no AA program in operation where race is the determining factor and all AA programs' starting point is that the candidate is qualified ... the AA benefit is the tie-breake, among qualified candidates.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....go back to earlier discriminatory practices against minorities with no legal recourse?
Look around you....discriminatory activities are still taking place in America, but are just not as overt as they once were. Take a look at the GOP and what they're doing nationwide in regards to voter suppression.
AA may not be a perfect program, but there are a ton of Americans who have benefited from the laws.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)How is that fair?
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)badtoworse
(5,957 posts)...and even if there were, it would be irrelevant. We're talking about decisions made on the basis of race, not the lack of opportunity. The fact that one ethnic group may have been historically disadvantaged compared to another group does not justify discriminating individuals of a certain ethnic group today.
Discrimination is just plain wrong.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)do you not understand?
It is, in the end, the basis of jurisprudence ... A wrong is identified and remedy is fashioned that in most cases, claws back the unjust enrichment of those benefitting from the wrong.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Discrimination is taking action in respect of someone because of his race, sex, sexual orientation, religion or some other factor not unique to that individual, in other words because he or she is part of a certain class. In the end, doing this impacts individual people and can't be justified.
What is the difference between denying a black student admission to a good school to keep the school white and denying admission to a white student to make the school population more black? In both cases, a student got screwed because of his race and both scenarios are wrong.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"Discrimination is just plain wrong..."
Many see the attempt to reduce and eliminate the historical consequences of both judicial and extra-judicial discrimination as discrimination itself.
That's just plain wrong, also.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)If the measures to address those historical consequences involve denying opportunities to some other ethnic group to favor the group that was harmed, that is most certainly discrimination.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)righting the wrong? Or, are we as a society to just say, "Oops, my bad. We promise not to do it again."
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Things we can do: We can grow a bigger pie and insure that everyone has fair and equal opportunities to gain a piece of that pie. We have laws in place that do that and we should enforce them. If we can indentify individuals, companies or other groups that illegally discriminated or are discriminating against classes of people, we should go after them civilly and criminally to the extent that is possible.
Things we should not do: Expand or reduce opportunities to different classes of people in an attempt to make up for past injustices to one or more classes of people. This will only prolong the racial divide we have in this country.
You are probably not going to like this this, but I don't believe it's possible or appropriate to make up for all the injustices over a 150 year period. We need to focu our efforts on insuring equal opportunity for everyone now.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I don't like:
But then, I bear the legacy that you would dismiss.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)I'm not dismissing the injustices of 150 years; I just don't believe they can all be righted. That doesn't diminish the extent of the injustice - it was very great.
Here is an analogous situation to ponder: Catholics were discriminated against in Ireland for hundreds of years and in Northern Ireland since the Irish War of Independence. The hatred between Catholics and Protestants there was at least as intense as the racial tensions we've had here and the violence much worse (at times it was close to open warfare). Many believed that a reconciliation was impossible. It ended with the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. The agreement addressed the injustices on a going forward basis, but did not try to right wrongs suffered by Irish Catholics historically - the Catholics basically walked away from them. Fourteen years is not long enough for history to pass judgement, but the peace seems to be holding and the hatred fading away. I suggest you consider the Irish experience and decide for yourself how must resentment for the past is worth holding on to.
I enjoyed the civil discussion on this and wish you the best.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)THe only legal justification is to try to create a diverse student body to facilitate learning.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)against people who had nothing to do with the discrimination and favoring the people who had the absolute least claim to being victims of systemic bias.
Don't you think remedial action should benefit the people who were victims of systemic discrimination without punishing people who had nothing to do with it in the first place?
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Given that, there is no reason why a college or university should be gathering that data from applicants.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)but it fails to take into account the persistence of inequality; it's one thing to say "I think that college admissions should be race neutral", it's something else and patently nonsensical to say "I think that a white student from Sunnyvale has had the same quality of education and the same opportunities as a black kid from Compton and we shouldn't act as though there's any difference". It's not just about addressing historic discrimination, it's about recognising and addressing persistent systemic inequalities that have a de facto discriminatory effect.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Well put.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)You had to make reference to CLASS in order to make your example work, and in doing so, (not so?) subtly attempted to conflate race and class.
You are aware that the majority of poor people in the United States are white, yes?
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)You are aware that a majority of white people are not poor, and that statistically speaking members of ethnic minorities are significantly more likely to live in poverty and deprivation, yes?In terms of absolute relative percentages, not total numbers. See for instance the following: http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=14&cat=1
Romulox
(25,960 posts)are interchangeable. They clearly are not.
That being the case, you have to do the heavy lifting of explaining why race, but not class, should be defining characteristics in our efforts to foster diversity on campus.
It's not a free-and-easy substitution.
Of course I am. What about this makes it acceptable to conflate class with race in a discussion of race based affirmative action? If a disproportionate number of the lower classes are people of color, then surely socio-economic based affirmative action will similarly disproportionately redound to the benefit of such communities.
Puregonzo1188
(1,948 posts)exists within our society.
TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)believe that there is no racism. It's ridiculous.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)uponit7771
(90,347 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)in affirmative action, race is the only consideration. In the case of the U of Texas, race is one of many considerations in their "holistic approach."
Further, you seem to think that AA programs favor the unqualified/lesser qualified "minority" over the more qualified white candidate; when in reality, AA benefits accrue AFTER the qualification question has been determined and has resulted in two (or more) desirable candidates. Without the AA component, we are left with the status quo (where the discrimination has always resided) to decide.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)I don't think race should be a consideration at all in the admission process and I don't think the application should contain questions about the applicants' race.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I know ... You do not think it possible or appropriate to address historic injustice.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Discrimination exists without it. It's sometimes called "last hired, first fired." In a college setting, it shows up in other ways - the lack of minority legacy students, biases in standardized tests, and just plain discrimination in interview processes for universities that use them. AA is an attempt to balance that. It doesn't create discrimination, it balances discrimination that already exists.
sadbear
(4,340 posts)and adopt socio-economic status and background, i.e. parents' education level, income, etc.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)sadbear
(4,340 posts)Socio-economic status is much more accurate. There is, of course, a lot of overlap, but poor white children do tend to perform worse than middle-class minorities. It's just a suggestion, though.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)misunderstanding of this issue. Neither ethicity nor Socio-economic status is a predictor of any form of sucess, academic or otherwise; though they may be a predictor of need.
sadbear
(4,340 posts)At least in Texas, secondary students in low socio-economic households statistically do not perform as well on standardized tests than those in higher socio-economic households.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I have no doubt that student from low socio-economic households perform worse on standardized tests; but standardized tests reflect current level of achievement and is not predictive of educational success.
sadbear
(4,340 posts)joeglow3
(6,228 posts)Thus, I fail to see your point?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)My point (in response to another poster) is neither ethicity nor Socio-economic status is a predictor of any form of sucess, academic or otherwise; though they may be a predictor of need.
sadbear
(4,340 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I think I see the disconnect ... You are talking about academic success; whereas, I am talking about the opportunity to compete. AA programming is premised on providing access/opportunity to competent candidates; not so much on what happens after they get the opportunity.
In other words, if the socio-economic based achievement gap were to somehow be erased, there still would be a need for race-based consideration to allow "minority" candidates access.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)would get preference over a desperately poor white kid from a trailer park.
Socioeconomic preferences are fine. Discrimination by race is not.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)got that way (wealthy and educated) despite suffering the discrimination that AA was enacted to address.
But further ... I ask that you not buy into the anti-AA narrative. There is not a college admission plan in America where race is a/the determining factor in admissions ... Race is but one factor. Under the U of Texas model, it is highly unlikely that an impoverished white kid would be passed over for a Black kid with wealthy parents.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but those asking the question have no attachment to facts or reality ... only their sense of losing something they feel entitled to, e.g., Ms. Fisher.
byeya
(2,842 posts)still disparaged and you hear that "Education is a tool of the Devil"
The only affirmitive action that makes sense to me is class based, not race based.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)in less than a generation?
AA was never intended to address all disparate educational opportunities ... It was intended to address disparate educational opportunities suffered by Blacks. If society wishes to create an alternate additional system based socio-economic class, so be it; but let's not pretend that all is well in race town.
byeya
(2,842 posts)advantage to kids whose parents are professors or accountants or members of other fairly well paid professions when other kids who are seriously disadvanteged don't get a crumb thrown their way.
It's important to remember that the two top state university systems, New York and California, had very small tuition fees until the Republican governors Rockefeller and Reagan began the endless climb placing higher education out of easy reach and leaving the country with more college debt than credit card debt.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)Or more in gross income, you are in the top 15% of American wage earners. You are not a victim, and you deserve no remediation based on race or gender.
In fact I want to see not an additional system, but the ONLY system, be based on income.
And no, I'm not pretending all is well in race town, but as the old saying goes..
"Life is like a shit sandwich. The more bread you have, the less shit you have to eat."
gollygee
(22,336 posts)There's a tendency for people to see intelligent poor white people as Cinderella stories, so there's a kind of emotional bias for them when compared to black people in similar economic conditions. Affirmative action is an attempt to balance discrimination that already exists, for instance the fact that people aren't as likely to see a poor black teenager who is very intelligent and see a Cinderella story.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)ask about grades and scores, but don't ask about skin color, to ensure that this does not factor into the decision.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Often there are in-person interviews, but even if there aren't, you can often tell a person's race by name, and what city/town/suburb they live in.
The point of affirmative action is that without it, people are generally biased toward white people.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Each applicant could be assigned a code number for this purpose.
ctaylors6
(693 posts)was not used as a factor for the large majority of students at the time the plaintiff applied. UT Austin automatically admits the large majority of its class from Texas high schools based solely on class rank. At the time of plaintiff's application, I believe it was the top 10% of high school classes.
For the remaining students admitted (those not in top 10% of their graduating classes), race could be used as a factor for admissions starting in 2005. But keep in mind the non-top-10% group includes recruited athletes who aren't automatic admits and lots of other random categories.
The list of admissions criteria as well as a ton of admissions stats are located here: http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report12.pdf
spanone
(135,849 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)and not by the color of their skin?
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)That could be done if all students were provided with the same tutoring and test prep that many white kids receive....someone suggested we base Affirmative Action on economic situations...that would work for me.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)of equal content of character and equal grades/test scores (as is the case where AA programming kicks in); but one hails for a discrete group that has historically been denied access to opportunities (as is the case were AA programming benefits attach); how is one to decide who is admitted and who is denied ... without falling back to the societal default that the AA programming was intended to address?
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)i.e., all other things being equal, consider race as a deciding factor, I would agree. But from what I've read of this case, this is not what happened here.
I'm trying to find more details, but according to the woman that filed the suit, she had a better academic and extracurricular record than some of the minority students that were offered admission. IF that's the case, and IF race was the factor that allowed less qualified students to be admitted over better qualified students, then I think that's discriminatory and wrong.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Where U of Texas provided evidence of more than 100 Black student that scored higher than Fisher and were also denied admission and 80+ white candidates that had lower scores/GPA than Fisher and were granted admission.
Further, the school has indicated that Fisher's grades and test score would not have got her admitted, even if she had been Black AND been afforded the AA consideration.
Viking12
(6,012 posts)It sure would silence some of the freepers posting in this thread
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Petitioner, a Texas resident, applied for admission to UT’s Fall 2008 freshman class in Business Administration or Liberal Arts, with a combined SAT score of 1180 out of 1600 and a cumulative 3.59 GPA. JA 40a-41a. Because petitioner was not in the top 10% of her high school class, her application was considered pursuant to the holistic review process described above. JA 40a. Petitioner scored an AI of 3.1, JA 415a, and received a PAI score of less than 6 (the actual score is contained in a sealed brief, ECF No. 52). The summary judgment record is uncontradicted that—due to the stiff competition in 2008 and petitioner’s relatively low AI score—petitioner would not have been admitted to the Fall 2008 freshman class even if she had received “a ‘perfect’ PAI score of 6.” JA 416a.
(Editorial note: meaning if she had received the full benefit of the AA consideration), including but not limited to racial consideration)
Petitioner also was denied admission to the summer program, which offered provisional admission to some applicants who were denied admission to the fall class, subject to completing certain academic requirements over the summer. JA 413a-14a. (UT discontinued this program in 2009.) Although one African-American and four Hispanic applicants with lower combined AI/PAI scores than petitioner’s were offered admission to the
16
summer program, so were 42 Caucasian applicants with combined AI/PAI scores identical to or lower than petitioner’s. In addition, 168 African-American and Hispanic applicants in this pool who had combined AI/PAI scores identical to or higher than petitioner’s were denied admission to the summer program. ...
http://www.utexas.edu/vp/irla/Documents/Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf
Two points I'd like to make ... First, my numbers were off. I must have confused the numbers from Grutter with this case. (Yes, I'm embarassed that I got it wrong, after stating and re-stating the numbers, as fact) But the point is clearly made ... Black (and Hispanic) candidates that scored better than Fisher were denied and white candidates that scored worse than Fisher were offered admission ... over Fisher AND the "better qualified" Black and Hispanic candidates. So her "I lost MY spot because of my race FAILS miserably.
Second ... The link I posted provides all of the trial record. Though I doubt anyone arguing against AA will read through them ... each level (trial court, Appellate Court, SCOTUS Briefs) provides more evidence that Fisher's claim fails.
But I suspect this case will not be decided on the facts; but rather, as here at DU, will be decided based on some false notion that all is well in raceville ... if only we'd stop talking about race.
Viking12
(6,012 posts)
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)The anti-AA crowd will ignore the facts in favor of the "poor white girl got screwed" narrative. Because if the white girl gets screw, so might they.
Viking12
(6,012 posts)Starting at 5:45
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46979745/vp/49319825#49319838
WOW!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"Policies designed to dry up whiite women's tears."
Wow!
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Now explain how that choice would square with the mission of AA, i.e., a remedial measure to address past and present racial discrimination.
Again, I would have no program with basing AA action on s/e status ... if that was what the program was designed to do or if racial discrimination in education were no longer an issue.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)than attempting to dredge up the past and settle old scores.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)still present in my life and the life of my daughter.
Further, this is not a zero sum matter, bastardizing a needed program in order to help another group is NOT progress.
Viking12
(6,012 posts)There is a strong social benefit of AA programs. AA programs indirectly benefit the majority students accepted as well as the student directly affected by acceptance. By exposing all students to the diversity of the real world, all students benefit economically, socially, and civilly.
I know, from 15+ years of experience in higher ed, the need for white suburban and rural students to interact with people different from themselves. They learn more from those interactions than they do from any reading I could assign.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)and also ensure that religions such as Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism are reflected in the student intake?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)how beneficial programs are bastardized to meaninglessness all for the sake of what about me.
Point: While diversity and "majority exposure" has become the selling point, let's not forget that Affirmative Action programming (in education) was established as a remedial program to address the historic (and current) disparity in educational opportunity for African-Americans. It was later extended to other groups that encountered similiar discrimination, with white women now being the prime beneficiaries.
Until that disparity ceases to exist, AA programming continues to be necessary and beneficial.
spanone
(135,849 posts)(and their grades)
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)perhaps we could move away from scrutinizing the skin color of college applicants.
spanone
(135,849 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)It's not about you ... but ironically, it remains about your daughter.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)but I bet she will still have an edge over black students when she applies for college, in another 15 years. Racism will take generations to recover from. We aren't there yet, despite our president. It's a bigger problem than just one person's achievement.
Viking12
(6,012 posts)King was an ardent supporter of AA programs. But you knew that, right?
"I have a dream that one day..." We're not there yet.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)than black or Hispanic Americans. I'm referring to women of ALL colors.
aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 10, 2012, 05:18 PM - Edit history (1)
Was she involved in any of the prior appeals?
elleng
(131,002 posts)ctaylors6
(693 posts)For those not familiar with recent history in Texas on this issue, the state legislature responded to the 5th Circuit's 1996 Hopwood decision by passing a law that basically said the top 10% of graduating public high school seniors would be admitted to the state universities. (The Hopwood decision said race could not be a factor in admissions; the US SC denied cert so Hopwood applied only to the 5th circuit until it was abrogated in 2003 by different US SC opinion.) The result of the law was that for any kid from any public high school, no matter the socioeconomics of the high school, would be admitted as long as graduated in the top 10%. A byproduct was that some kids who went to very competitive high schools (public or private) would have a much lower chance of getting into UT Austin etc. if they were outside of their schools' top 10% even if they had very high SAT scores, lots of AP credits, etc.
Anyway, I find it very interesting what the school's brief said that about who would get a preference. Seems to be opposite of intent behind that 10% law. In Texas, the question for many after Hopwood became which was a better approach: the race-blind but socio-economically relevant top 10% rule OR allowing admissions departments to use race as a factor.
I may go read the briefs ....
wilt the stilt
(4,528 posts)we have Affirmative action in their own court.
elleng
(131,002 posts)imo there's a decent chance Supremes will decide to NOT review this, instead decidee that plaintiff lacks 'standing,' OR that they'll split 4/4 so lower court decision stands. (Kagan recused from the case.)
unblock
(52,262 posts)of at least that seems to be ut's position here....
it's rotten that any schoiol, particularly a public university, is deliberately seeking children of wealthy families over children of poor families, regardless of any racial/enthic considerations. but that's a problem that's pervasive in our economy, even if we had no racial/ethnic discrimination.
of course, such discrimination has created financial hardship, makes financial discrimination even more problematic....
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)
I'm a white middle class woman who benefited from Affirmative Action because of my field of study - Mechanical Engineering. I can assure you that any advantages I ever received because I am a woman were more than compensated for by the way some treated me because I am a woman.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)And the girl was denied entry because her test scores and grades weren't good enough, not because of anyone else's race. There is no quota in Texas.
swayne
(383 posts)THE UNFORTUNATE FACT IS THAT IT COULD ACTUALLY BE A GENDER ISSUE. WHY IS SHE AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMING RACE IS THE ISSUE?
There is no such this as "less qualified" once you meet or exceed a qualification.
Once you are qualified, you ARE by definition qualified.
If people were admitted and NOT qualified, then this student would perhaps have a point.
The other thing that I would add is, why is this a RACE issue?
White women have been the BIGGEST beneficiary of AA.
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)This is where I have a problem with AA.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Petitioner, a Texas resident, applied for admission to UT’s Fall 2008 freshman class in Business Administration or Liberal Arts, with a combined SAT score of 1180 out of 1600 and a cumulative 3.59 GPA. JA 40a-41a. Because petitioner was not in the top 10% of her high school class, her application was considered pursuant to the holistic review process described above. JA 40a. Petitioner scored an AI of 3.1, JA 415a, and received a PAI score of less than 6 (the actual score is contained in a sealed brief, ECF No. 52). The summary judgment record is uncontradicted that—due to the stiff competition in 2008 and petitioner’s relatively low AI score—petitioner would not have been admitted to the Fall 2008 freshman class even if she had received “a ‘perfect’ PAI score of 6.” JA 416a.
(Editorial note: meaning if she had received the full benefit of the AA consideration), including but not limited to racial consideration)
Petitioner also was denied admission to the summer program, which offered provisional admission to some applicants who were denied admission to the fall class, subject to completing certain academic requirements over the summer. JA 413a-14a. (UT discontinued this program in 2009.) Although one African-American and four Hispanic applicants with lower combined AI/PAI scores than petitioner’s were offered admission to the
16
summer program, so were 42 Caucasian applicants with combined AI/PAI scores identical to or lower than petitioner’s. In addition, 168 African-American and Hispanic applicants in this pool who had combined AI/PAI scores identical to or higher than petitioner’s were denied admission to the summer program. ...
http://www.utexas.edu/vp/irla/Documents/Brief%20for%20Respondents.pdf
Two points I'd like to make ... First, my numbers were off. I must have confused the numbers from Grutter with this case. (Yes, I'm embarassed that I got it wrong, after stating and re-stating the numbers, as fact) But the point is clearly made ... Black (and Hispanic) candidates that scored better than Fisher were denied and white candidates that scored worse than Fisher were offered admission ... over Fisher AND the "better qualified" Black and Hispanic candidates. So her "I lost MY spot because of my race FAILS miserably.
Second ... The link I posted provides all of the trial record. Though I doubt anyone arguing against AA will read through them ... each level (trial court, Appellate Court, SCOTUS Briefs) provides more evidence that Fisher's claim fails.
But I suspect this case will not be decided on the facts; but rather, as here at DU, will be decided based on some false notion that all is well in raceville ... if only we'd stop talking about race.
cecilfirefox
(784 posts)
pampango
(24,692 posts)Amicus Curiae
Briefs in Support of Respondent (University of Texas)
The United States
17 United States Senators
66 Members of Congress
38 Members of the Texas State Senate and House of Representatives
57 Fortune 100 and Other Leading American Businesses
21 Small Business Owners and Associations
Six Former FCC Commissioners, a Former FCC General counsel, and the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council
Teach for America
37 Former Senior DOD/National Security/Military Leaders
The Family of Heman Sweatt
10 Leading Public Research Universities
The Ivy League and Six Additional Private Colleges and Universities
California Institute of Technology and Nine Additional Private Research Universities
Fordham University and Seven Additional Catholic Universities
Amherst College and 36 Additional Private Colleges and Universities
The University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
Appalachian State University and 35 Additional Colleges and Universities
Houston Community College System
Dean Robert Post, Yale Law School, and Dean Martha Minow, Harvard Law School
President and Chancellors of the University of California
State of California
The State of New York, 13 Additional States, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands
National League of Cities and 16 Additional National Organizations, Higher Education Leaders, and Public Sector Leaders
American Bar Association
New York State Bar Association
Association of the Bar of the City of New York
Boston Bar Association, 10 Additional Bar Associations, the City of Boston, EMC Corporation, National Grid USA, and 24 Law Firms
College Board and 12 Additional Education Organizations
American Council on Education and 39 Other Higher Education Organizations
National Education Association and 27 of its Affiliated State Education Associations, AFL-CIO and its Affiliated National Unions, the Service Employees National Union, and People for the American Way Foundation
National Association of Basketball Coaches, Women's Basketball Coaches Association, Black Coaches and Administrators Organization, and 43 Current and Former Basketball Coaches and Administrators
6 Constitutional Law Scholars and the Constitutional Accountability Center
Association of American Medical Colleges and 29 Additional Healthcare Education Organizations
Association of American Law Schools
Society of American Law Teachers
Law School Admission Council
American Educational Research Association and Seven Additional Research Associations
11 Empirical Scholars
444 American Social Science Researchers
Kimberly West-Faulcon, Loyola Law School Los Angeles
Dr. Robert D. Putnam, Harvard School of Government
American Psychological Association
95 Experimental Psychologists
13 Social and Organizational Psychologists
16 Religious Organizations and Campus Ministries
American Jewish Committee, Central Conference of American Rabbis, and Union for Reform Judaism
Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, 18 Additional Asian and Pacific Islander Organizations, and 52 Higher Education Officials
Asian American Center for Advancing Justice and 74 Additional Asian and Pacific Islander Organizations
NAACP, the Texas State Conference of NAACP Branches, and Barbara Bader Aldave
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the UT Black Student Alliance, and the Black Ex-Students of Texas, Inc.
United Negro College Fund
American Civil Liberties Union
Anti-Defamation League
Coalition of Black Male Achievement Initiatives
Coalition of Four Bar Associations of Color
23 National Latino Organizations
Advancement Project
Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by any Means Necessary, and United for Equality and Affirmative Action Legal Defense Fund
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and 17 Additional Civil Rights Organizations
Brennan Center for Law and Justice at NYU School of Law and the League of Women Voters of the United States
National Women's Law Center and 23 Additional Civil Rights Organizations
Five Human Rights Advocate Groups
Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic
American Association for Affirmative Action
28 Undergraduate and Graduate Student Organizations Within the University of California
35 Distinguished Alumni of UT-Austin
14 Former and Recent University of Texas Student Body Presidents
United States Student Association
National Black Law Students Association
Council for Minority Affairs at Texas A&M University and Three Additional Student Organizations, and 167 Texas College Students for Diversity
Harvard Graduate School of Education Students for Diversity
David Boyle
Emory OUTLaw and Emory Latin American Law Students Association
Briefs in Support of Petitioner (Fisher)
Texas Association of Scholars
The Center for Individual Rights
The Honorable Allen B. West
Mountain States Legal Foundation
American Civil Rights Union
California Association of Scholars, et. al.
Abigail Thernstrom, et. al.
Scholars of Economics and Statistics
Southeastern Legal Foundation, Inc.
Current and Former Federal Civil Rights Officials
Judicial Watch, Inc. & Allied Educational Foundation
Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, et. al.
Asian American Legal Foundation & the Judicial Education Project
Cato Institute
The American Center for Law and Justice
Gail Heriot and other members of the United States Commission on Civil Rights
Pacific Legal Foundation, et. al.
Briefs in Support of Neither Party
Equal Employment Advisory Council
Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor, Jr.
http://www.utexas.edu/vp/irla/Fisher-V-Texas.html
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)until you point out that 60+% of the incoming freshmen class are freshwomen.
