Skip to comments.Supreme Court to take up UT admission case [may strike down racial and ethnic considerations)
Posted on 10/08/2012 8:01:59 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
In the fall of 2008, the University of Texas enrolled 10,335 minority students, not including Asian-Americans. As far as Abigail Fisher was concerned, that was one too many.
Fisher had made good grades in high school - a 3.59 average on a 4.0 scale - posted a score of 1180 on the SAT test and finished as number 82 in a graduating class of 674 at Stephen F. Austin High School in Sugar Land. She figured that was good enough. Then came those dreadful words: "We regret to inform you ..."
Fisher was heartbroken. Her dad went to Texas, and her sister. She bled burnt orange. "I had dreamt of going to UT since the second grade," she said.
This week Fisher may get a little payback. On Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the lawsuit she brought against the school that challenges an admissions policy that openly allows for the use of racial preferences. If she's successful - and legal pundits are saying there is a good chance - colleges and universities could henceforth be banned from even considering the racial or ethnic backgrounds of applicants.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
This has already been ruled on in the Michigan case...
Bye Bye quota’s..
We already have an affirmative action product racial quota President. Too bad they didn’t give him some racial preference points during the debate, he might have had a chance at a tie.
The Left will either ignore the ruling or find a way around it. Their holy rites must continue.
1. Why aren't Asian-Americans considered a minority?
2. What is she suing for? What damages?..Does she want to be admitted? Or force the UT Bookstore to buy back all her Longhorn gear?
Seems like a simple case. Should the Obama girls, Bill Cosby’s offspring, Herman Cain’s grandchildren, Jesse Jackson Jr.s kids, etc. be given priority over someone else who may have grown up deprived, worked hard to overcome obstacles, but happens to have white skin, as they say: through no fault of their own?
#1 - Because they excel in schooling and don’t blame whitey.
The eyes of Texas are upon you....
yet thousands get taxpayer money for Pell Grants,
with TOTAL SAT scores of less than 800 !
Southern University at New Orleans, Louisiana Graduation rate: 4% Undergraduates: 2,590 Median SAT score: 715 Pell Grant recipients: 75.8%
1. Why aren’t Asian-Americans considered a minority?
THAT is the $64,000 question !!!
that, is the elephant in the room.
along with the fact that crime rates for Asians,
are lowest of all.
...kind of destroys 99% of the left’s “minority” arguments.
Chief Justice Roberts will probably decide for the majority that Racial Quotas are not actually Racial Quotas. Rather, they are Racial Taxes and therefore constitutional.
Asians are actually discriminated AGAINST because they are “over-represented” in college admissions.
If Asian-American's SAT scores were lumped in with Black's and Latino's scores, minority SAT scores might be equal to or higher than majority SAT scores. (I think the PC term is now "underrepresented minority" to distinguish Blacks, Latinos and Native Americans from those dull, uninteresting, overperforming "overrepresented minorities".) This doesn't fit in at all with the beliefs and goals of PC university admissions committees.
1) The goal is equal outcome, not equal opportunity.
Otherwise, uncomfortable cultural differences are brought into question, and that can not be allowed to happen, as it lays bare the lie.
“1. Why aren’t Asian-Americans considered a minority?”
I recently had the opportunity to attend a high school graduation.
The valedictorian plus the next 9 top students were announced because they all received full-scholarships to major universities.
The valedictorian and the top 5 behind her were all Asian females. The 7th was Asian male.
They were follwed by a Caucasian male, a Caucasian female and an African-American female.
Does that answer your question?
In other words, they blow everyone else out of the water so that there is no need to call them “minority”.
This isn’t an isolated case. It happens across the country with the same results.
I think it should be absolutely illegal for any federal, state or local government funded entity to EVER ask questions about race. Just the question being on applications should be a flat-out violation of the Equal Protection Clause, must less race being allowed to be used for quotas, admissions or hiring.
Any government agency or instutition that receives government tax dollars should be 100% color and race blind.
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” John Roberts
The way around it is the essay. It is often easy to tell, both from style and content, when an essay has been written by a minority.
What I have observed locally is that in order to increase minority numbers in a school, they will drop the cutoff score for admissions test (in order to increase the number of eligible minorities), then they will admit ALL minorities who exceed the minimum cutoff score. They use the essay question to justify this and there is no way to protest it because the scoring of an essay is so subjective.
He's out of date. UT whined and stomped its feet because it's jocks weren't smart enough to get admitted under the Top 10% rule (which became law for all of Texas' public universities because of Hopwood v. UT 1996 when lower scoring minorities were admitted to UT Law over higher ranking whites). In 2009, UT president actually said with a straight face they'd have to close down the football program if they had to follow the law. HAHAHAHAHA! As if UT would EVER not have Longhorn football, SNORT! As a result of that latest steaming pile of bs from the lib tea-sipping treehuggers and a waste of untold tax dollars and legislature time wasted, as of fall semester of 2011, UT has to only admit the Top 8% SAT scoring freshmen while the rest of the state still has to admit the Top 10% meaning UT has more opportunity to admit what they consider deserving students regardless of their SAT scores.
That said, this girl's case was from 2008 when UT was required by law to admit the Top 10% (you are automatically admitted if you graduate in the top 10% of your high school class, if you don't then your application has to compete with everyone else). By law she would have had a tough climb to be admitted to UT. Who knows how the case will go but from what I see, she doesn't have much of a chance:
The above chart shows the 2008 Top 10% admits for their freshman class were: 48% white, <1% Native Amer, 6% black, 20% Asian, 23% Hispanic. The Non-Top 10% were: 65% white, 1% Native American, 5% black, Asian 14%, and 13% Hispanic.
As for the Asians, you can see from the chart there is a huge percent of them at UT. Walk through the music department and you'll not see anyone but Asians. Why the case isn't considering Asians a minority is anyone's guess.
Seems a whole lot of people of color being judged by the color of their skin vs the content of their character. Funny the people who demanded a holiday for MLK seem all too willing to turn their back on his ideals.
Seems like the folks who believe in states’ rights have forgotten about them as far as this issue is concerned. Does a state have no right to set its own criterion without being second guessed by the federal government?
Impossible. Longhorn gear is priceless. And it's called the University Co-op.
That was before we saw the other side of John Roberts, he who went left to strike down part of the Arizona immigration law, and then saved Obamacare.
He probably enjoyed the good press he got from those two rulings.
The question that always pops into my mind when I hear or read about this case is why is the challenge is coming from Texas. By that I mean, why is it necessary? I mean, yes, I’d love for the Sup Court to finally get it right and just strike down the use of racial preferences, but why are preferences even allowed in allegedly conservative Texas?
The GOP has controlled Texas for years now, and the legislature supposedly got more conservative in 2010. So why hasn’t the allegedly conservative Republican legislature and the allegedly conservative Rick Perry done anything about it? Surely they have some control over the public universities in the state don’t they? Why don’t they end the use of racial preferences?
Maybe I shouldn’t single out Texas, because I can’t recall ever hearing of a Republican controlled state govt stepping in to end preferences in their public institutions of higher learning. They’ve done nothing at the federal level either.
Why is the GOP so worthless on this issue?
Surely, you already know the answer to your question, don't you?
It's because Republicans are afraid. Afraid of the media. Afraid of being called the "R" word.
So, any time racial preferences are at issue, they're going to cower in the corner. <
Besides which UT is more or less a law unto itself. "The University" has been allowed to do pretty much what it wants to do. In fact, I'm not sure it even takes any state money -- having a vast endowment of oil royalties.
In deciding to use racial preferences though, who is really making the decision? It seems in almost all cases to be bureaucrats in state agencies. It’s not like there are state laws mandating the use of racial preferences.
Nor is there is a federal law or Sup Court decision mandating the use of racial preferences in college admissions. The past Sup Court decisions have said that they can be used, not that they must be. I’m not aware of any state legislature having the stones to do what is right and end preferences, but several states have put it to the people for a direct vote and in all (but one I think???) cases, the people have voted down preferences.
States are fully able to end the use of preferences in their public institutions. The reason they don’t, even in allegedly conservative states like Texas, is cowardice. Well, there are other reasons (like the Jack Kemp strain of the party who actually support preferences and buy into the Diversity nonsense), but fear of being called names is at or near the top of the list.
Now I should add that the freedom of states to end the use of racial preferences has come into question recently. In 2006, as the GOP went down in flames, the people of Michigan voted overwhelmingly to pass a state constitutional amendment banning the use of racial preferences. Her majesty Sandra Day O’Connor (retired by then), who had saved the use of racial preferences a few years earlier, said that she thought the vote from the rubes of Michigan to be perfectly legitimate. How generous of her! However, a federal court has since struck down the state amendment. The crazy opinion says something like the banning of preferences via an amendment would make it harder for minorities to reverse it at some future date, therefore its unconstitutional! It really is one of the all time activist decisions with it’s twisted reasoning. Hopefully it will be overturned on appeal, but I never expect good things from the courts.
But my point is that the ability of the states to end the use of preferences was never in doubt until recently with this crazy federal court decision. So there is no excuse for GOP inaction on this. A Sup Court decision would be nice, but it shouldn’t be necessary. The states can and should end preferences, and their implementation by bureaucracies should never be permitted to stand.
Yeah, I do know the answer. I just wish the GOP couldn’t so brazenly betray the people who actually vote for them (i.e. whites) like they do.
I certainly don’t know the circumstances of how UT operates. But as long as they are a public university, then the legislature should be able to exercise some control over it. I would be its more about the cowardice than giving UT a free reign.
I stand corrected.....LOL
As part of a way of funding public education in The University of Texas System, two million acres of land were placed in the PUF - one million of which were in west Texas and deemed too worthless to survey by the Texas & Pacific Railroad.
Initially, the only money in the PUF came from leasing grazing rights on PUF land.
However, it just so happens that a chunk of the west Texas PUF land sits on top of the Permian Basin . . . and the PUF now generates revenue from oil, gas, sulfur, and water royalties, rentals on mineral leases, and other sources.
The PUF funds are state funds. A portion of the revenue flows each year into the Annual University Fund. 2/3 of that amount goes to UT and 1/3 goes to Texas A&M.
Contrary to the idea that UT has its own money and doesn't get money from the State of Texas, all of the PUF/AUF money it receives is government money via the Texas State Constitution.
Thanks for the clarification.
No problems. I'd ask how things are going in Rexroat, County Line, Butner, Little, and a dozen other Oklahoma towns, but some of them don't exist any longer. One of my grandfathers was building drilling rigs at the age of thirteen and hit about every company oil and gas town in Oklahoma.
Over at Texas A&M, they have their own Diversity Plan that's much more extensive than just admissions. I'm sure UT has the same - and you'll find the same at other universities if you just know where to look.
Don't make UT the scapegoat in this.
You clearly haven’t lived in Austin. Travis county, the seat of the state Capital is a hotbed of liberal activism. The UT campus is literally one-city block from the Capital building and it churns out thousands of liberals a year who want to live and work in Austin. Keep in mind that Texas has 1,024 counties (that’s not a typo - over 1,000), and every election you can easily spot Travis county when they show colorized maps to show which way the counties voted. Texas is conservative, but the legislature isn’t.