"Answer suppressed"

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
JedBartlett
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:13 am

"Answer suppressed"

Postby JedBartlett » Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:19 pm

When I look at some of the PDFs before submitting applications, some answers say "Answer suppressed." For example, under demographics for Berkeley it said "answer suppressed" even though I responded to my answer normally. It also did this for the gender section.

Does anyone know why this is?

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby stillwater » Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:27 pm

The use of affirmative action by California public universities is banned, so maybe that's why?

User avatar
Yardbird
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 1:45 pm

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby Yardbird » Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:31 pm

stillwater wrote:The use of affirmative action by California public universities is banned, so maybe that's why?
uhh not entirely. They can use it as a "plus factor" according to Bakke and the two Michigan cases (Gratz and Grutter) seem to go along the same lines - they can use it as a plus (all other things being equal).

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby Renzo » Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:24 pm

shadowofjazz wrote:
stillwater wrote:The use of affirmative action by California public universities is banned, so maybe that's why?
uhh not entirely. They can use it as a "plus factor" according to Bakke and the two Michigan cases (Gratz and Grutter) seem to go along the same lines - they can use it as a plus (all other things being equal).


It's banned by California law now, I believe.

JedBartlett
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:13 am

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby JedBartlett » Sat Sep 22, 2012 11:19 am

Ok, that explains it. Thanks guys. I was just wondering because it seemed so strange that it would suppress the answer.

-Jed

michlaw
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby michlaw » Sat Sep 22, 2012 12:37 pm

Both California and Michigan passed state laws (or voter initiatives) that prohibit using race as a factor in admissions. California passed Prop 209 and Michigan passed the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (currently under appeal). These supersede the Supreme Court ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger in those states. I think the State of Washington has one also, but has no highly ranked Law Schools.

BigZuck
Posts: 10851
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby BigZuck » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:10 pm

michlaw wrote:Both California and Michigan passed state laws (or voter initiatives) that prohibit using race as a factor in admissions. California passed Prop 209 and Michigan passed the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (currently under appeal). These supersede the Supreme Court ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger in those states. I think the State of Washington has one also, but has no highly ranked Law Schools.


Subtle anti-UDub trolling.

michlaw
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby michlaw » Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:07 pm

Unintended east coast bias. I apologize. I see it sitting there proudly at number 20. Great school. Have never heard it mentioned as it relates to race, but Washington State banned affirmative action in 1998.

User avatar
SaintsTheMetal
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:08 am

Re: "Answer suppressed"

Postby SaintsTheMetal » Sat Sep 22, 2012 10:18 pm

LSN *definitely* shows an URM boost for those schools. Make sure to submit a DS uf black or whatever i suppose.. :roll:




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests