Court upholds California affirmative action ban
Source: AP
By CHRISTINA HOAG, Associated Press 27 minutes ago
LOS ANGELES (AP) Affirmative action proponents took a hit Monday as a federal appeals court panel upheld California's ban on using race, ethnicity and gender in admitting students to public colleges and universities.
The ruling marked the second time the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals turned back a challenge to the state's landmark voter initiative, Proposition 209, which was passed in 1996.
Affirmative action proponents, who had requested that the court reconsider its 1997 decision after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that affirmative action could be used in college admissions, said they would continue fighting.
...
(Attorney George B. Washington, who is representing the group of minority students and advocacy groups that filed the latest challenge in January 2010) said he would ask the full appellate court to review the case since this decision was issued by a three-judge panel.
...
Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hNzPnMA20yvuvCn8kPDkwsqQomFA?
alp227
(32,019 posts)Discrimination is NEVER acceptable. No one should be admitted to college or hired simply on the basis of race or gender. And I was almost surprised that the supreme court did this ruling but then saw appeals court in the article. In fact, the 9th circuit court in San Francisco has a reputation for ruling liberally.
The Northerner
(5,040 posts)EFerrari
(163,986 posts)and not with academic achievement.
Sorry, alp, I didn't have time to do 25 extra curricular activities because I was the sole support for two kids. Oh, and I was admitted with a 4.0. Not a 4.5 because, of course, I couldn't afford a school that did that kind of rating.
Phi Beta Kappa didn't care, once I was admitted, and neither did graduate English where I was admitted in a class of 19 out of a field of several thousand. But, the admissions office had to factor in that I had no money and didn't go to a prep school just to let me in the door.
So, fuck that. This is a horrible decision for thousands of qualified students in California.
alp227
(32,019 posts)i was thinking too little when posting, but my point is still valid as children attending poorer districts are less likely to be on a college-bound track in the first place.
meanwhile the NY Times has this analysis piece "To Enroll More Minority Students, Colleges Work Around the Courts":
Other colleges have spent more time recruiting in underrepresented communities. And the University of California system tries to weigh a students life beyond grades and test scores which, critics say, sometimes amounts to giving racial preferences without acknowledging them.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Here's what the Orwellianly named "California Civil Rights Initiative" accomplished:
http://wc.arizona.edu/papers/91/139/05_1_m.html
We experienced a 43 percent drop in African American and a 33 percent drop in Latino admissions. Berkeley had even worse numbers; there was a 66 percent drop in African Americans and 59 percent in Latino admits. 1,200 African American, Latino and Native American applicants were denied entrance to UCLA and Berkeley, with an average GPA of 4.0 and an average SAT score of 1280. Again, that is hardly unqualified. These are the students who would have been here.
To bring a sense of horror to you, in 1953 (the year before Brown vs. Board of Education) 43 African Americans enrolled at UCLA; next year the expected number of enrollments is 50. There was one African American at Berkeley's Boalt Hall Law school this year; Little Rock had nine. And why is it that no one is mentioning the 7 percent drop in women's admissions? Or how about the 5 percent drop in white admissions (socioeconomic cases like myself)?
The truth is, we do have people at UCLA who received preferential treatment in admissions. The L.A. Times broke this story last year. These people are unqualified and shouldn't be here. These people have an average GPA of 3.2 and average SAT scores of 1000. The Times story cited that they were the sons and daughters of friends of the regents and the governor. The regents allow themselves the right to get people into UC schools and refuse to change this practice. How many of these students were allowed into UCLA and Berkeley? Three hundred. Three hundred students with an average GPA of 3.2 and average SAT scores of 1000 were admitted over the past three years. That is preferential treatment, and those are unqualified students. And that happened again this year, and again next year and every year after that.
And spiraling tuition costs will pretty much finish the job.
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)I hope the appeal is successful.
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)but I don't think states are obligated under the constitution to practice it. If they want to ban affirmative action, unwise as I think that is as a policy, they may ban it.
Neue Regel
(221 posts)Only 30% of the current freshman class is white. Simple math tells us that the remaining 70% are minorities. From the article in the OP:
Although blacks, Latinos and Native Americans comprise about half of California's high school graduates, they make up only 19.5 percent of the current freshman class at UC Berkeley. Whites compose roughly 30 percent and Asians 48 percent. The remainder is out-of-state students.
alp227
(32,019 posts)and the media generally considers 'minority' in the context of college admissions are blacks and Hispanics.
Neue Regel
(221 posts)And if being 13% of the population does not classify a group as a minority, how does one determine what groups are classified as minorities?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_California
According to 2010 US Census California's population was 40.1% Non-Hispanic White, 6.2% Black or African American, 13.0% Asian, 1.0% American Indian, 0.4% Pacific Islander and 4.9% from two or more races. 37.6% of the total population are Hispanics or Latinos of any race.
alp227
(32,019 posts)Neue Regel
(221 posts)Is the goal to have student body demographics mirror the state?
alp227
(32,019 posts)in various fields: in this case the demographics of a state vs. the demographics of a state's public university system.