Wow, more fan service from the court. (And sorry if already posted.) https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/supreme-court-s-ruling-on-online-harassment-18176690.php 7-2 decision supporting a wide swath of online harassment as free speech. Bad news for KPJ fans?
Oh, the stigma is real, I don't deny that. The stigma is racist though, its based on negative stereotypes that certain people are not as smart as others because of their race. The stigma is not going away at all based on this decision, like I don't think anyone is changing their minds based on this. They just think black people were taking spots away from others. It's wishful thinking though but that black doctor and hispanic lawyer will still have their ability doubted by sections of the country because that doubt in the first place comes from the idea that some races of people are better than others.
Yes. That is an easy argument to make. For example many Universities talk about how diversity is important to their campus life. An applicant could make the argument that admitting them adds to that diversity.
Well then they're just contradicting themselves. If we take the majority opinion at its total word there are still ways to consider an applicant's race.
Are you? I'm just an overeducated architect who does read and write contracts and codes. It's actually pretty similar. If we interpret how both parts work though is that a University can't just say as long as you mention your race in an essay we can get you in but that you have to actually discuss how race has affected your life and how that would add to the university. That means that race could still be a factor just not the only the factor and the argument by the applicant and university is how that affects the university as a whole.
tell me you didn't read the opinion w/o telling me you didn't read it: "universities may not simply establish through application essays the regime we hold unlawful today."
The more you post the more you expose yourself as a grifting troll. It's fascinating watching you expose your true colors
I think speech rights should be heavily respected, and it's harder for SCOTUS to decree enforcable rules than to disallow overreach. The next step should be what kind of laws Congress can write to prevent the nasty stuff stalkers and deadbeats do. Cynicism against tech giants to do something net positive is well deserved, but even their maximal efforts would invite scorn because of their scale and unofficial legitimacy as the enforcer of speech without representation nor transparency. I guess we better hope for more tech savvy geeks to grow up and start getting elected to Congress before even more **** hits the fan.
re: Affirmative Action, I'll have to look into Barrett's opinion as White Women have been among the largest beneficiaries of AA in colleges and at the workplace.
https://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=405116 Does this mean that affirmative action is done? Oh no. No no no no no. Schools have been abandoning objective tests of academic potential as well as emphasis of a student's grades precisely because they anticipated that this was coming. They are getting rid of all merit-based measures of a student -- so that they can continue affirmative action admissions without leaving a paper trail behind. Admissions will be based 100% on student essays, or, let's be honest and call them Student Declarations of Grievance and Disadvantage, because that's all they'll be going forward. And schools like Harvard will continue to rate Asian students as "lacking personality and interest," because they need to find some excuse for denying the admission of academic standouts. This will be the next series of court battles -- suing schools for Not-So-Stealth continuation of affirmative action policies, and trying to subpoena applications materials and evaluations of students.
Question for the author here or anyone that agrees with the author...if say Blacks and Hispanics are graduating at around 95% (at Harvard), on par with other groups, then what is the issue? Clearly the ones that are going are deserving to go or else they wouldn't graduate from the school so what are we complaining about here? That there should be more Asians and less Blacks? Based on what? Asians are overrepresented at Harvard (and so are Blacks) so I'm just not really understanding the claim that Harvard, in particular here, is somehow being Anti-Asian. I think we'd need to see the reason they denied many of these student's no? Maybe that person only did well on tests while the other student also did well on test BUT also published a book in high school or did tons of community work etc? A school like Harvard considers more than just a test score, the test score gets your admission consideration, that's it. To me the argument I hear is "There should be less of this group..." or "This group is taking spots from another" but I'm not sure what that's being based on when I look at the graduation rates of these groups.
