Justice Scalia and the "Mismatch Phenomenon"

[Underverse]

Looking at the data I see no reason to think it was a factor in her case. We even know that had she been a minority she still would not have scored highly enough to gain entry.

Yes. I agree with you. My point is that affirmative action programs - while they may not have affected her - still exist and therefore still affect other people, unless they are defunct, which seems not to be the case given data on the stratification of admissions scores by race at ivy league colleges.

[Wells]

Yes. I agree with you. My point is that affirmative action programs - while they may not have affected her - still exist and therefore still affect other people, unless they are defunct, which seems not to be the case given data on the stratification of admissions scores by race at ivy league colleges.

Yeah and I'm fine with them effecting admissions as part of a holistic admissions process. Student body diversity is sufficient merit. Thisd case should have been thrown out.

[Deleted]

I didn't say that.

No you implied it.
The reality is that the lower courts sided with the university because that is in line with prior rulings, Scotus can change their minds, something it looks like they are at least thinking about.

The admissions policy itself isn't injury. You can't just look at a law and say its unfair and file a suit.

Yes you can - there is a legal term for it and all.

You have to show its negatively impacted you.

Nope.

She hasn't demonstrated that because by all observable data, it hasn't. By your own citation she only named an admission fee as damages. And yeah, I'm sure Scalia thinks that, the dude is an open racist.

and 6 other people agreed with him that harm of racial discrimination alone constituted injury.
And To be clear - 100 dollars still constitutes injury.

She's exactly what you people all freak out about, a mediocre person who is using race to try to get treatment that she hasn't earned.

How the fuck is removing race as a consideration trying to get better treatment?
Or is you argument that a black person who is less qualified earned it by being black?

[Rasulis]

Evaluation of university candidate enrollment qualifications is not a straight forward process, especially, at undergraduate level. If you are an admission officer and had to make decisions based on these scenarios, what would be your decision?

Is a student with a 4.0 GPA and no AP or honor classes better than a student with 3.8 GPA who has taken many AP and honor classes?

How about a student with 3.7 GPA from the no. 1 public school in the U.S. versus a 4.0 GPA student from a school that is not even ranked in the top 100?

Would you prefer a student with 2,100 SAT score from a wealthy family who has never had work before or a student who has 1,900 SAT score but come from a single parent family and has had to work all through high school?

How much value would you put on a compelling and well written essay?

There is a lot of subjectivity when it comes to candidate selection. Race gives the admission officer another criterion to use when the other parameters are close. If you have a GPA of 4.0 and SAT score of 2,200, you are not going to lose your spot to any minority student with a 3.5 GPA and 1,900 SAT score. On the other hand, if you have a GPA of 3.5 and SAT score of 1,800, you better apply to more than 1 university.

[Wells]

No you implied it.

You're confusing what you want me to be saying with what I am.

and 6 other people agreed with him that harm of racial discrimination alone constituted injury.

And as we've had to repeat to you over and over, there is no evidence of racial discrimination, let alone harm from it. Worse white students got in. She's just a mediocre candidate.

How the fuck is removing race as a consideration trying to get better treatment?

She's suing for being discriminated against even when her race even a deciding factor. She's trying to use the court system to get something she has no reason to be entitled to.

- - - Updated - - -

Just to clear something up ahead of time, if the Court strikes down holistic AA does that count as judicial activism given that the plaintiff wasn't even harmed by the practice?

[Deleted]

You're confusing what you want me to be saying with what I am.

Or courts are political machines like everything else in government.

Democrats don't like AA?
You clearly implied they had political motivations, you go wherever you want with that now.

And as we've had to repeat to you over and over, there is no evidence of racial discrimination, let alone harm from it. Worse white students got in. She's just a mediocre candidate.

read the admissions policy -

She's suing for being discriminated against even when her race even a deciding factor. She's trying to use the court system to get something she has no reason to be entitled to.

She along with every single white person was discriminated against.

Just to clear something up ahead of time, if the Court strikes down holistic AA does that count as judicial activism given that the plaintiff wasn't even harmed by the practice?

I dont know the definition of 'judicial activism' but that usually involves creating rights - banning something that a plain text reading of the constitution bans i don't think that qualifies.

[Wells]

She along with every single white person was discriminated against.

Except again, she wasn't. Her race did not keep her out of school. Not sure how that's still needing to be brought up.

[Deleted]

Except again, she wasn't. Her race did not keep her out of school. Not sure how that's still needing to be brought up.

She was still discriminated against - she was discriminated against the second anybody was accepted on non meritorious crap like race.

[Spectral]

Yeah and I'm fine with them effecting admissions as part of a holistic admissions process. Student body diversity is sufficient merit. Thisd case should have been thrown out.

Are you bothered by the underrepresentation of white students at elite universities? Should these universities discriminate against Asian-Americans more than they already do? Put another way, is the appropriate level of representation for every race the level at which it's represented in the general population?

[Deleted]

Are you bothered by the underrepresentation of white students at elite universities? Should these universities discriminate against Asian-Americans more than they already do? Put another way, is the appropriate level of representation for every race the level at which it's represented in the general population?

and where should the cutoff point be regarding when a college should consider the whole nation for its 'diversity' instead of just the state?

[Wells]

She was still discriminated against - she was discriminated against the second anybody was accepted on non meritorious crap like race.

Its a fascinating definition of discrimination that doesn't require she actually be the victim of anything. Her race neither kept her out of UT nor could it have gotten her in. She was too mediocre of a student for it to matter.

Are you bothered by the underrepresentation of white students at elite universities? Should these universities discriminate against Asian-Americans more than they already do? Put another way, is the appropriate level of representation for every race the level at which it's represented in the general population?

My preferred approach to the entire vexed question would be to provide higher education in the same manner we provide primary education to anyone who can maintain a satisfactory GPA while doing so.

[Spectral]

My preferred approach to the entire vexed question would be to provide higher education in the same manner we provide primary education to anyone who can maintain a satisfactory GPA while doing so.

I don't understand the reply. There's a scarcity of positions available. There are a lot more people that can pull a 3.0 at Harvard than will get the opportunity to pull a 3.0 at Harvard. The competition for that opportunity is fierce, and someone has to lose. The question is whether people will lose based solely on their merits as students, or whether they should be discriminated for/against based on their race. If the answer is, "we need more black people", I'm going to need to understand why it's alright to do that primarily at the expense of Asian students (the evidence in California after the policy change is that white people are represented about the same either way - it's the black, Asian, and Latino populations that change with AA).

[Wells]

I don't understand the reply. There's a scarcity of positions available. There are a lot more people that can pull a 3.0 at Harvard than will get the opportunity to pull a 3.0 at Harvard. The competition for that opportunity is fierce, and someone has to lose. The question is whether people will lose based solely on their merits as students, or whether they should be discriminated for/against based on their race. If the answer is, "we need more black people", I'm going to need to understand why it's alright to do that primarily at the expense of Asian students (the evidence in California after the policy change is that white people are represented about the same either way - it's the black, Asian, and Latino populations that change with AA).

I think its because we're taking differing understandings of what the goal of AA should be. I'm not interested in employing it to create some kind of ideal pie chart of representation. To my mind the goal behind AA should be to account of inherent systemic difficulties faced in students reaching that point. Just as we might look more fondly on a poor student who does well with all the limitations imposed by poverty over a rich student who does very well with all the advantages that entails I believe the same should be applied for statistical difficulties imposed by the remaining racial bias in our country.

Basically: the playing field isn't level from the outset, so just looking at the results of the game outside of context isn't fair.

But again, this is only how I'd prefer an imperfect system be implemented if better won't happen. Were it up to me you'd be having well funded state universities taking every capable student at state expense.

[Rasulis]

I don't understand the reply. There's a scarcity of positions available. There are a lot more people that can pull a 3.0 at Harvard than will get the opportunity to pull a 3.0 at Harvard. The competition for that opportunity is fierce, and someone has to lose. The question is whether people will lose based solely on their merits as students, or whether they should be discriminated for/against based on their race. If the answer is, "we need more black people", I'm going to need to understand why it's alright to do that primarily at the expense of Asian students (the evidence in California after the policy change is that white people are represented about the same either way - it's the black, Asian, and Latino populations that change with AA).

No. Asian enrollment in the UC system stayed the roughly the same prior to and after the passage of Prop 209 which prohibits race, ethnicity and sex from being use as consideration by state institutions. White went down from 40% in 1997 (prior to Prop 209) to 26% in 2010, and Latino went from a low of 11% in 1998 to a current high of 20%. African American went down from 6% to 3%. To me it looks like AA was being used to get more white students into the UC system at the expense of Latino students.

Just joking. Likely it has more to do with the fact that CA has a lot of second and third generations Latino students which are highly motivated.

Seriously though, a 3.0 GPA high school student will have a rough time in Harvard. When I was at U.C. Berkeley, 3.5 GPA was bottom of the barrel. As in if your GPA fall below 3.5 and you don't get it up the next semester, you are out of the program.

[Super Kami Dende]

I don't see where she is wrong though.

If you only get into a Higher learning institute because of your Race even after having a lower score than other people, of course you will have a harder time succeeding.

College/universities should be completely free of this affirmative action bullshit. Everyone should be on the same grading system, If you have the grades you should get in.

If that leaves colleges at 80% asian 20% everyone else, so be it.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you bothered by the underrepresentation of white students at elite universities? Should these universities discriminate against Asian-Americans more than they already do? Put another way, is the appropriate level of representation for every race the level at which it's represented in the general population?

Every race doesn't need representation. If you race lacks representation it just shows that the people of said race aren't applying themselves as much as they could.

[Felya]

If you only get into a Higher learning institute because of your Race even after having a lower score than other people, of course you will have a harder time succeeding.

Then the issue should be the 47 students that got into the school with lower grades than her, not just the 5 that were black.

[Wells]

I don't see where she is wrong though.

If you only get into a Higher learning institute because of your Race even after having a lower score than other people, of course you will have a harder time succeeding.

Except this isn't how AA works....You still have to be capable.

College/universities should be completely free of this affirmative action bullshit. Everyone should be on the same grading system, If you have the grades you should get in.

Which assumes everyone is starting from the same baseline.

- - - Updated - - -

Then the issue should be the 47 students that got into the school with lower grades than her, not just the 5 that were black.

Or the...what, 158 white kids with lower grades who got in.