Extra URM consideration this cycle because of SCOTUS?

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
Manhattanman
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:16 am

Re: Extra URM consideration this cycle because of SCOTUS?

Postby Manhattanman » Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:37 pm

His GPA was around a 3.5 (averaged between both undergrads), and his LSAT was about median for Havard's incoming class that year. He graduated in the top 14% at Harvard.

kaiser
Posts: 2940
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 11:34 pm

Re: Extra URM consideration this cycle because of SCOTUS?

Postby kaiser » Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:23 pm

michlaw wrote:Why would it be considered a insult to President Obama if he was the beneficiary of diversity consideration in his college career? Is there some suggestion going on here that anyone who benefits from diversity is somehow inferior? As the first black president I feel he should stand up for Grutter. What's the problem with that? I think it is true that he was very outspoken while at HLS about the lack of diversity among the faculty. Where is that spirit now? Did he have the grade only horsepower to get from Occidental to Columbia and on to Harvard Law? We will never know. That was not my point. Furthermore it is the nature of this forum for people to freely talk about their gpa and lsat. If I poster asks for opinions on where to apply the numbers are always the first question. I have no idea why the President will not release his grades.


Therein lies one of the biggest inherent problems of AA: any African American who reaches some level of success and stature will always have people questioning whether or not that success was predicated on AA. One one hand, someone like President Obama or Clarence Thomas could just say to hell with the haters, and not care what the doubters think. But on the other hand, it is such a shame that, after reaching such a high level of success, that so many people would try to somehow invalidate your achievements.

I think that is why you don't have too many African American people of high stature grandstanding for AA: They don't want to implicitly convey that they themselves may have actually been the beneficiaries. And its that uncertainty and self-doubt that is such a shame.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Extra URM consideration this cycle because of SCOTUS?

Postby vanwinkle » Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:50 pm

Okay, this is veering into a debate about the merits of AA, which categorically isn't allowed in this forum.

Since OP wasn't asking for specific advice, locked.




Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest