U.Va. Law School to select new admissions director. Current admissions policies discriminate.

The Washington Times ^ | April 29th, 2002 | Washington Times

[NationalDebtGrows]

"Black applicants have a far better chance of admission to the two leading Virginia law schools [University of Virginia, and William & Mary] than Asians and Hispanics. Blacks with LSAT scores of 160 and grade-point average of 3.25 have a 95 percent chance of being admitted to Virginia, versus a 3 percent chance for equally qualified Hispanics and whites, and a 5 percent chance for Asian applicants."

[NationalDebtGrows]

U.Va.'s Law School is about to select a new admissions director. I wonder if the next one will believe that some minorities are more equal than others. Are we prepared to sit still while a prominent law school potentially acts in a way that could empower future generations of liberal statists with a Top Ten law school degree?

[07055]

I find it interesting that the only reason UVA's policy is questioned is because there is discrimination in favor of blacks but against Hispanics. No one cares when the discrimination is in favor of blacks and Hispanics but against whites and Asians.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Almost all the top schools do this. UVa is the rule, not the exception.

[anniegetyourgun]

#3 is correct. Even with an initiative to the people (that passed overwhelmingly) in our state to outlaw discrimination by the public sector in jobs, hiring, admission, etc. - the libs still try to discriminate.

BTW, welcome to FR.

[shawnlaw]

Despite being a middle age white dude, I was recently accepted to the LLM Tax program (Master of Laws in Tax..YIKES!) at Wash U St. Louis. I guess there are exceptions to every rule...

[lawdude]

In 1989 I was a 27 year resident of Arizona. I had received a BS-Physics from Ariz. State in 1968. Paid taxes and raised a family in the state. My LSAT was in the top 10% that year. I applied at ASU, U of AZ and U of S. Dak. I received notice that I had been accepted at U of A but that was rescinded as an error a few days later. ASU rejected me out of hand. So I went to USD. The next year I was accepted at ASU because they had a large number of first year failures.

I later heard from an inside source that they rejected me in order to allow a group of "otherwise unqualified minorities" a preference.

They all (mostly) failed the first year, leaving a hole in their class (and tuition revenues)!

Oh, I am white, male, christian, 48 YO (then). I, apparently, was not 'diverse' enough!

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

Congratulations. You evidently have superior credentials. The issue is not whether someone with outstanding grades/entrance scores is admitted over someone with less compelling bona fides. The issue is whether candidates with equivalent credentials are separated into categories so that the one with the greater amount of melanin is admitted ahead of equally (or more) qualified fairer-skinned applicants.

[tjg]

"Master of Laws in Tax"

Sounds more like a sentence than an acceptance.

[07055]

Back in 1979, while I was living in New Jersey, I applied to Rutgers Law School, Seton Hall Law School, and the University of Texas at Austin Law School.

The only one of the three that required an essay was Seton Hall. I wrote that I wanted to become a lawyer so that I could fight affirmative action in the courts.

I was almost immediately accepted to Rutgers and University of Texas---but for some strange reason was rejected by Seton Hall.

You don't think they judged me on my political beliefs, do you? /sarcasm off.

[mrs9x]

The UVA Law School Admissions director is not being fired...he is retiring this year because he is getting high in age. I am currently at UVA Law School, and trust me, no one is quitting and nothing is changing here. BTW, I am a white student.

[Labyrinthos]

I'm much more concerned about the affirmative action program that benefits the offspring of wealthy white alumni, who are aften accepted into prestigious colleges and universities, not because of academic achievment or high scores on the SAT, LSAT, GSAT, etc., but simply because their last names qualify them for preferential treatment over more qualified applicants whose primary negative is the lack of a notable pedigree.

[07055]

I'm much more concerned about the affirmative action program that benefits the offspring of wealthy white alumni

I'm not.

The Constitution doesn't prohibit discrimination based on the "old boy" network, as frustrating as it may be for those who lose out (which, of course, also include blue collar whites).

It does prohibit discrimination based on race.

[NationalDebtGrows]

If you're at U.Va. Law then perhaps you can tell us if U.Va. Law's only obligatory Constitutional Law Class STILL entails 8 weeks of covering the ("coincidentally" pro quotas) Equal Protection clause, while completely EXCLUDING all First Amendment topics (which are nevertheless tested on any bar exam)? Meanwhile, does U.Va.'s Law Review still have the Virginia Plan which annually gives at least a half a dozen African Americans a ticket to prestigious law review membership when other qualifications hurdles aren't successfully surmounted by such people of the politically correct pigmentation? How about the disproportionately highly paid Professor Alex Johnson...does he still have his "blacks only" academic club? Why isn't it open to people of any color who are of economically disadvantaged backgrounds? Does Alex still go out of his way to publicly humilliate white students in class so that black students can observe and subsequently feel better or something? Also, do pictures in The Virginia Lawyer still suggest that as much as 40% of U.Va.'s Law School student body is black?

[Labyrinthos]

The Constitution doesn't prohibit discrimination based on the "old boy" network, as frustrating as it may be for those who lose out (which, of course, also include blue collar whites).

Actually, the Constitution does prohibit discrimination based on the "old boy" network. However, because the discrimination does not involve a suspect classification (i.e., race, religion, national origin) the standard of review is extremely deferrential in that the classification will be upheld as long as its rationally related to any conceivable legitimate state interest.

[07055]

You are correct.

But, we still end up in the same place--discrimination in favor of "good old boys" or "good old girls" is not unconstitutional at this time.

Personally, I believe that all admissions decisions should be based only on merit. But, I suppose I might feel differently if I had donated $100,000 to my alma mater and had a low performing child ready to apply to the school.

But that still wouldn't make it right.

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

Yeah, and I am mad because the sun rises in the east!

[Labyrinthos]

But, I suppose I might feel differently if I had donated $100,000 to my alma mater and had a low performing child ready to apply to the school.

Why do the names "Gore" and "Kennedy" come to mind? (And as much as I like and admire the guy, I suspect that President Bush is also the beneficiary of "old Boy" affirmative action.)

[NationalDebtGrows]

U.Va.'s Law School is considered quite good at avoiding "old boy affirmative action". That's one reason why Dean Al Turnbull (who came along AFTER Teddy Kennedy studied there) will be greatly missed. Notice how low a caucasian's chances are of getting in if one's scores are as low as the typically admitted black person's? The same even goes for Asians and Hispanics. So why is there such a racial spoils system still intact there, centuries after slavery ended? Why has Dean Turnbull's hand been forced like this so distortedly over the years? After all, many Asian Americans today have arguably endured much tougher hardships during their own lifetimes, and the same goes for Hispanics. Blacks, on the other hand, were born speaking English. Most didn't have to transplant from one country to the next in the name of survival, either. And do you think for one moment that they would go as out of their way to help economically disadvantaged whites, Asians or Hispanics if given the chance? Just to give one of many examples, former governor Douglas Wilder (an African American who was elected governor of Virginia a decade ago) spent his post-election years (and Virginia tax dollars) repeatedly wining, dining and taking state-subsidized helicopter rides to "entertain" Patricia Kluge, who subsequently divorced her husband (a man who happened to be Doug Wilder's leading campaign donor...). There are so many OTHER examples of such ungrateful callousness that I think the time is right to democratically demand that the future admissions director at U.Va. Law embrace the notion that preferential treatment be limited to being awarded merely on the basis of verifiable socioeconomic disadvantages. If you think that this would lend itself to even more abuse than the current racial spoils system, then I think it's worth noting that white people have enrolled at U.Va. after having claimed to be black, and when confronted they've justified doing so because they claimed that some great great great grandfather was African American or North African or something to that effect. No form of social engineering, or lack of it, is going to be absolutely perfect. But the status quo sure seems to leave plenty of room for improvement as U.VA. Law selects its new admissions director during the upcoming days and weeks.

[Labyrinthos]

Perhaps the best approach is have a totally blind admissions program, where the only identifying information on the application and supporting documents is a computer generated random number assigned by a third party (i.e., the SAT people in Princeton). That, of course, would result in student body at the more selective schools that is predominately white, Asian, and to a lesser extent Hispanic, and probably reduce over time the alumni dollars that flow to the more selective schools.

[NationalDebtGrows]

A totally blind admissions program could also reduce the intellectual diversity at institutions of higher learning. As a result, graduates would have a tougher time identifying with members of juries, law enforcement officials, or witnesses, or victims, who are all frequently from other walks of life. Nevertheless, does it not seem that U.Va. Law's current racial spoils system which disproportionately favors blacks (and no other ethnic group) is a blunt instrument AT BEST? Meanwhile, is pigmentation really the best indicator for intellectual diversity? Socioeconomic factors seem far more helpful in the quest for intellectual diversity. It would seem that it's being ignored though, unless of course one's neither Asian, Hispanic or white.