 |
|  |
 |
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote: Originally posted by PLATO1003
Racial diversity is a good thing |
If you see it as a good thing - why do you propose that interracial marriages be encouraged in order to make us all 'mullatto' ? After all, that is an admission that different races living together is an undesirable situation. If everyone becomes 'mullatto' that will be an end to diversity, which you seem to think is a good thing. Do you only see it as a good thing because it will lead to homogenization of the races?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:29
|
|
This is silly. I can't see how government has any compelling interest in racial diversity - I don't, and neither does anyone I know. Race, to me, is a total non-issue, and it should be the same everywhere else.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Imran Siddiqui

|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970 time: 00:29
|
|
Skimming through the opinions, I see some interesting things.
1st, the main reason why O'Conner backs the law school policy, but NOT the undergrad's policy is because of 'individualized review of applicants'. Under the law school's application policy, every applicant is reviewed individually and race might be a boost to his application. Diversity qualifications are considered on a case-by-case basis. In the undergrad case, it is simply 20 points for being an underrepresented minority. There is little, if any, individualized review of applicants under this system. Diversity qualifications are applied automatically to everyone that falls under the catagory in undergrad.
Therefore the undergrad's policy is NOT narrowly tailored to the compelling governmental interest in diversity (Grutter, ie the law school case, held that diversity is a compelling interest), while the law school's is (because it is individualized and may not always apply).
Another consideration (and one that sways Rehnquist as well) is that while race counts for 20 points, other 'diversity' classifications such as leadership or art talent, etc. only can account for, at most, 5 points. So race counts FOUR times more than the maximum non-minority talented individual can recieve as a boost (even if he is the next Beethoven or Monet).
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Guynemer
|
|
Maybe I'm too close to the situation here, but everyone I've spoken to here in A2 is very surprised by the decision; we all pretty much expected the opposite, with the Law School being struck down, but LSA being upheld. The Law School talks about a "critical mass", which is honestly a code for a quota. But the undergraduate case didn't have that at all... very strange.
And for the umpteenth time, the undergraduate process DOES take into consideration class! No poor white kids were being left behind by U-M admissions. They got 20 points too. It is also highly misleading to compare the 20 points to the "12 points students get for a perfect SAT." The SAT is only one component of the academic factors that the U. takes into consideration; academics total well over 100 points in the admissions process.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
The Templar
|
 |
People's Republic of the East Village
Oct 2001 time: 00:29
|
|
quote: Originally posted by David Floyd
This is silly. I can't see how government has any compelling interest in racial diversity - I don't, and neither does anyone I know. Race, to me, is a total non-issue, and it should be the same everywhere else. |
Race is very much an issue in the US - even if it isn't to you. The law has historically disadvantaged several minorites for hundreds of years. Now they get a slight advantage. Boo hoo! If your cracker ass can't overcome that slight advantage after benefiting from years of white privilege, you don't belong in a top school.
Moreover, because race is an issue in general - especially for every minority who gets questioned by a cop for no discernable reason other than they "match a description". The social construction of race leads to viewpoint diversity in a serious way. Both my property class and criminal law class at law school were very much enriched by a strong minority presence - black, hipanic, and asian. A class filled with prep school richboy crackers or middleclass suburban whiteboys would not have been as interesting.
And what the hell is "merit" anyway? A score on a single standardized test? You spend years preparing for higher/professional education and it all comes down to an SAT 2 or LSAT score? Oh yeah, that's a real measure of merit! Grades? Aside from the fact no institution ever really trusts another institutions grades (due to rampant inflation) most grades are inherently subjective. Even math and science (if you are giving partial credit on problems or asking theoretical questions) admit a strong subjective factor. So where is the merit? Come on all you crackers crying about merit, give it a definition!
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|