SCOTUS grants cert to race-based admissions cases
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 12:01 last edited by
They combined the Harvard case with the UNC case.
Great discussion about it on the latest Advisory Opinions podcast with David French and Sarah Isgur. They read some pretty damning texts and emails between admissions officers that came out of discovery. Worth a listen if this topic interests you.
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 12:24 last edited by
Just started listening to this. Thanks for the link.
Gonna be interesting.
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 12:43 last edited by
"The Brown Girl..."
Ho. Lee. Carp.
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 13:43 last edited by
What link? Supreme Court website says there is no oral argument scheduled for today. :man-shrugging:
-
What link? Supreme Court website says there is no oral argument scheduled for today. :man-shrugging:
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 13:45 last edited by@axtremus said in SCOTUS grants cert to race-based admissions cases:
What link? Supreme Court website says there is no oral argument scheduled for today. :man-shrugging:
-
@axtremus said in SCOTUS grants cert to race-based admissions cases:
What link? Supreme Court website says there is no oral argument scheduled for today. :man-shrugging:
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 13:49 last edited by@lufins-dad , thank you!
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 14:04 last edited by
(President of Harvard Lawrence) Bacow states:
Yesterday, the Supreme Court announced a decision that could put forty years of legal precedent at risk. Colleges and universities could lose the freedom and flexibility to create diverse campus communities that enrich education for all. Our admissions process, in which race is considered as one factor among many, makes us stronger. It prompts learning in day-to-day exchanges in our classrooms and laboratories, in our residential houses, and on our playing fields and stages. Our students understand these truths and see them reflected in their interactions with their classmates. Diversity opens our eyes to the promise of a better future.
Harvard celebrates and nurtures individuality as intensely as this nation. Those who challenge our admissions policies would ask us to rely upon a process far more mechanistic, a process far more reliant on simple assessments of objective criteria. Each of us is, however, more than our numbers, more than our grades, more than our rankings or scores. Ask yourself, how much have you learned from other people at this University? How much have you grown from conversations across difference? Would these conversations have been as rich if you had shared the same interests, the same life experiences, and—yes—the same racial or ethnic background as your fellow community members? This is why applications of any kind routinely go beyond mere numbers to include interviews, samples of work product, recommendations, and references. Narrowly drawn measures of academic distinction are not the only indicators of individual promise.
As the Supreme Court has recognized many times, race matters in the United States. I long for the day when it does not, but we still have miles to go before our journey is complete. Harvard will continue to defend with vigor admissions policies that were endorsed in the thoughtful decisions of two federal courts that concluded that we do not discriminate; our practices are consistent with Supreme Court precedent; there is no persuasive, credible evidence warranting a different outcome. Though I wish yesterday had turned out differently, I remain confident that the rule of law—and the respect for precedent that perpetuates it—will prevail.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
You can read blogger Mirengoff's comments on that letter at the link above.
-
(President of Harvard Lawrence) Bacow states:
Yesterday, the Supreme Court announced a decision that could put forty years of legal precedent at risk. Colleges and universities could lose the freedom and flexibility to create diverse campus communities that enrich education for all. Our admissions process, in which race is considered as one factor among many, makes us stronger. It prompts learning in day-to-day exchanges in our classrooms and laboratories, in our residential houses, and on our playing fields and stages. Our students understand these truths and see them reflected in their interactions with their classmates. Diversity opens our eyes to the promise of a better future.
Harvard celebrates and nurtures individuality as intensely as this nation. Those who challenge our admissions policies would ask us to rely upon a process far more mechanistic, a process far more reliant on simple assessments of objective criteria. Each of us is, however, more than our numbers, more than our grades, more than our rankings or scores. Ask yourself, how much have you learned from other people at this University? How much have you grown from conversations across difference? Would these conversations have been as rich if you had shared the same interests, the same life experiences, and—yes—the same racial or ethnic background as your fellow community members? This is why applications of any kind routinely go beyond mere numbers to include interviews, samples of work product, recommendations, and references. Narrowly drawn measures of academic distinction are not the only indicators of individual promise.
As the Supreme Court has recognized many times, race matters in the United States. I long for the day when it does not, but we still have miles to go before our journey is complete. Harvard will continue to defend with vigor admissions policies that were endorsed in the thoughtful decisions of two federal courts that concluded that we do not discriminate; our practices are consistent with Supreme Court precedent; there is no persuasive, credible evidence warranting a different outcome. Though I wish yesterday had turned out differently, I remain confident that the rule of law—and the respect for precedent that perpetuates it—will prevail.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
You can read blogger Mirengoff's comments on that letter at the link above.
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 14:14 last edited by@george-k said in SCOTUS grants cert to race-based admissions cases:
Our admissions process, in which race is considered as one factor among many, makes us stronger.
Try considering race to select the white guy first and see how strong that makes you.
-
They combined the Harvard case with the UNC case.
Great discussion about it on the latest Advisory Opinions podcast with David French and Sarah Isgur. They read some pretty damning texts and emails between admissions officers that came out of discovery. Worth a listen if this topic interests you.
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 14:20 last edited by@jon-nyc said in SCOTUS grants cert to race-based admissions cases:
They combined the Harvard case with the UNC case.
Great discussion about it on the latest Advisory Opinions podcast with David French and Sarah Isgur. They read some pretty damning texts and emails between admissions officers that came out of discovery. Worth a listen if this topic interests you.
I assume the texts and emails were also available in the deliberations of the lower courts?
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 14:58 last edited by
I assume they came out in discovery very early.
I think lower courts have been ruling for the defendants based on earlier Scotus precedent. But I hope and expect the court will reverse precedent.
-
(President of Harvard Lawrence) Bacow states:
Yesterday, the Supreme Court announced a decision that could put forty years of legal precedent at risk. Colleges and universities could lose the freedom and flexibility to create diverse campus communities that enrich education for all. Our admissions process, in which race is considered as one factor among many, makes us stronger. It prompts learning in day-to-day exchanges in our classrooms and laboratories, in our residential houses, and on our playing fields and stages. Our students understand these truths and see them reflected in their interactions with their classmates. Diversity opens our eyes to the promise of a better future.
Harvard celebrates and nurtures individuality as intensely as this nation. Those who challenge our admissions policies would ask us to rely upon a process far more mechanistic, a process far more reliant on simple assessments of objective criteria. Each of us is, however, more than our numbers, more than our grades, more than our rankings or scores. Ask yourself, how much have you learned from other people at this University? How much have you grown from conversations across difference? Would these conversations have been as rich if you had shared the same interests, the same life experiences, and—yes—the same racial or ethnic background as your fellow community members? This is why applications of any kind routinely go beyond mere numbers to include interviews, samples of work product, recommendations, and references. Narrowly drawn measures of academic distinction are not the only indicators of individual promise.
As the Supreme Court has recognized many times, race matters in the United States. I long for the day when it does not, but we still have miles to go before our journey is complete. Harvard will continue to defend with vigor admissions policies that were endorsed in the thoughtful decisions of two federal courts that concluded that we do not discriminate; our practices are consistent with Supreme Court precedent; there is no persuasive, credible evidence warranting a different outcome. Though I wish yesterday had turned out differently, I remain confident that the rule of law—and the respect for precedent that perpetuates it—will prevail.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
You can read blogger Mirengoff's comments on that letter at the link above.
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:00 last edited byEach of us is, however, more than our numbers, more than our grades, more than our rankings or scores.
Yeah, unless you're Asian. Then you're less than your numbers, less than your grades, less than your rankings or scores.
-
(President of Harvard Lawrence) Bacow states:
Yesterday, the Supreme Court announced a decision that could put forty years of legal precedent at risk. Colleges and universities could lose the freedom and flexibility to create diverse campus communities that enrich education for all. Our admissions process, in which race is considered as one factor among many, makes us stronger. It prompts learning in day-to-day exchanges in our classrooms and laboratories, in our residential houses, and on our playing fields and stages. Our students understand these truths and see them reflected in their interactions with their classmates. Diversity opens our eyes to the promise of a better future.
Harvard celebrates and nurtures individuality as intensely as this nation. Those who challenge our admissions policies would ask us to rely upon a process far more mechanistic, a process far more reliant on simple assessments of objective criteria. Each of us is, however, more than our numbers, more than our grades, more than our rankings or scores. Ask yourself, how much have you learned from other people at this University? How much have you grown from conversations across difference? Would these conversations have been as rich if you had shared the same interests, the same life experiences, and—yes—the same racial or ethnic background as your fellow community members? This is why applications of any kind routinely go beyond mere numbers to include interviews, samples of work product, recommendations, and references. Narrowly drawn measures of academic distinction are not the only indicators of individual promise.
As the Supreme Court has recognized many times, race matters in the United States. I long for the day when it does not, but we still have miles to go before our journey is complete. Harvard will continue to defend with vigor admissions policies that were endorsed in the thoughtful decisions of two federal courts that concluded that we do not discriminate; our practices are consistent with Supreme Court precedent; there is no persuasive, credible evidence warranting a different outcome. Though I wish yesterday had turned out differently, I remain confident that the rule of law—and the respect for precedent that perpetuates it—will prevail.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
You can read blogger Mirengoff's comments on that letter at the link above.
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:03 last edited by@george-k said in SCOTUS grants cert to race-based admissions cases:
Harvard will continue to defend with vigor admissions policies that were endorsed in the thoughtful decisions of two federal courts that concluded that we do not discriminate
If they would at least be honest: "Yes, we discriminate by race but we think it's ok and serves a higher purpose. I get that it must suck to get that rejection from us because you have the wrong ethnicity, but those are the breaks."
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:04 last edited by
I find interesting Sarah's thoughts that this could end up being argued this year.
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:15 last edited by Klaus
What does "grant certiorari" mean? Merely that they'll consider the case?
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:20 last edited by
Yes. Several thousand cases are submitted every year for consideration, they accept 100-150.
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:25 last edited by
OK, but it is in no way predictive for the outcome, right?
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:28 last edited by
@klaus said in SCOTUS grants cert to race-based admissions cases:
OK, but it is in no way predictive for the outcome, right?
No, but it does indicate that they see potential flaws in lower court rulings…
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:29 last edited by jon-nyc
Not in general, but the granting of cert requires minimum 4 votes.
And race-based admissions are longstanding (~40 yr) precedent.
So if you want to grant cert you almost certainly want to reverse or at least alter precedent.
But to decide the case they need 5 votes. We don't know how many voted to grant cert. I'm guessing 5 or 6. I suspect they have the votes on the court to overturn it outright.
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:31 last edited by
So in the past SCOTUS said "Race-based admission is ok" and now they may say "not ok"?
Can the SCOTUS just say "We changed our mind. Instead of X, now "not X" is the law"?
-
wrote on 26 Jan 2022, 15:34 last edited by
Yes they can change longstanding precedent but it's not that common.
Re race-based admissions they elide over it with flowery language, just like the Harvard president above. They say "wholistic admissions with race as one factor" instead of the more honest 'we discriminate against individuals on account of their race and ethnicity as a means to an end'.
