07-08-2015, 05:48 PM
Indeed the US Supreme Court is looking at it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/01/us/pol...sions.html
In the past (Gutter v. Bollinger; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grutter_v._Bollinger), the US Supreme Court ruled that schools can consider race in making admissions decisions, but in a related case (Gratz v. Bollinger; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger) the court ruled that schools cannot offer a predetermined point allocations to students of a particular race. The original affirmative action case (Regents of the University of California v. Bakke; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_of...a_v._Bakke) found that affirmative action is legal, though specific quotas are not. It might seem clear to you that elite universities have a "complex quota system which favors... people of (certain kinds of) color", but in light of UC regents v. Bakke, the admissions process at Stanford is designed to improve the racial/ethnic diversity at Stanford without imposing a "complex quota" or that even awards a quantifiable advantage to minorities.
Beyond race, which is presumably an immutable quantity, I don't see how the use of non-academic achievement (i.e., athletic achievement, musical achievement, etc.) in admissions would fail to pass muster in the federal courts. It is not axiomatic that admissions to a school has to be based solely on academic achievement, and, in fact, I think it is desirable that schools consider other factors. While there are disproportionately fewer Asian American athletes out there, being Asian American is not a disqualification for being a collegiate athlete (Lindsey Yamasaki, for example).
The common theme underlying the complaints is that (measurable) academic achievement in high school is or ought to be the sine qua non determinant for admissions to elite universities and therefore that disparities in academic achievement between groups applying to such universities necessarily implies discrimination against one group. I reject that assertion. There may indeed be discrimination against one group. However, I don't think you can use disparities in grades and scores as evidence thereof.
BC
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/01/us/pol...sions.html
In the past (Gutter v. Bollinger; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grutter_v._Bollinger), the US Supreme Court ruled that schools can consider race in making admissions decisions, but in a related case (Gratz v. Bollinger; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger) the court ruled that schools cannot offer a predetermined point allocations to students of a particular race. The original affirmative action case (Regents of the University of California v. Bakke; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_of...a_v._Bakke) found that affirmative action is legal, though specific quotas are not. It might seem clear to you that elite universities have a "complex quota system which favors... people of (certain kinds of) color", but in light of UC regents v. Bakke, the admissions process at Stanford is designed to improve the racial/ethnic diversity at Stanford without imposing a "complex quota" or that even awards a quantifiable advantage to minorities.
Beyond race, which is presumably an immutable quantity, I don't see how the use of non-academic achievement (i.e., athletic achievement, musical achievement, etc.) in admissions would fail to pass muster in the federal courts. It is not axiomatic that admissions to a school has to be based solely on academic achievement, and, in fact, I think it is desirable that schools consider other factors. While there are disproportionately fewer Asian American athletes out there, being Asian American is not a disqualification for being a collegiate athlete (Lindsey Yamasaki, for example).
The common theme underlying the complaints is that (measurable) academic achievement in high school is or ought to be the sine qua non determinant for admissions to elite universities and therefore that disparities in academic achievement between groups applying to such universities necessarily implies discrimination against one group. I reject that assertion. There may indeed be discrimination against one group. However, I don't think you can use disparities in grades and scores as evidence thereof.
BC