Fisher v UT Repercussions Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
Teflon_Don
- Posts: 474
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 7:04 pm
Fisher v UT Repercussions
So this week SCOTUS decided to hear the Fisher v UT case about race as a factor in admissions. Arguments are suppose to begin Oct/Nov. If (or when) the court rules in favor of Fisher, do you think this decision will have an affect on URM's applying in the Fall? I'd really like to hear some feedback on this, thanks!
-
Hjones33
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:07 pm
Re: Fisher v UT Repercussions
I was wondering the exact same thing. I don't think anyone can have a good answer for you as no one knows. It's not looking good though (if one favors aa) because of the court being more conservative than the 2003 ruling.
It should also be interesting if they do rule that aa shouldn't be in place, if top schools still will go below some of the medians to take a more diverse class or if it will just be about numbers.
It should also be interesting if they do rule that aa shouldn't be in place, if top schools still will go below some of the medians to take a more diverse class or if it will just be about numbers.
-
tww909
- Posts: 247
- Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:41 am
Re: Fisher v UT Repercussions
legally any decision, even at its most broad, would only implicate state run law schools, because in order to show a violation of the equal protection clause, an individual most show some state action. therefore any of the private schools that one might apply to would not be bound by the decision in any way and can already consider race in whatever way they like.
nevertheless, from what i'm aware of in the facts of the case, it seems like the presence of some unique facts (the top 10% of hs class guaranteed admissions) and some technical standing issues, it may be that the court doesn't end up ruling in a broad enough manner that ends up directly overruling grutter/gratz.
nevertheless, from what i'm aware of in the facts of the case, it seems like the presence of some unique facts (the top 10% of hs class guaranteed admissions) and some technical standing issues, it may be that the court doesn't end up ruling in a broad enough manner that ends up directly overruling grutter/gratz.
-
johansantana21
- Posts: 855
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:11 pm
Re: Fisher v UT Repercussions
Schools will find a way to admit numerically inferior URM applicants even if the court decides that AA is unconstitutional.
Do you really want 50% of your class being Asian? You think having 50% of people at Harvard being smart asians will help it's image?
Do you really want 50% of your class being Asian? You think having 50% of people at Harvard being smart asians will help it's image?
