Rarity of Mexicans/Puerto Ricans in Law School Forum

[ArchRoark]

If you look at the applications many of them ask "Are you Hispanic?" then ask to choose which race that describes you, with the options being White/Black/Asian/Pacific Islander/American Indian. I was confused when I first saw this on applications. Do I just leave the racial question blank? Or answer hispanic yes + white... Interested in hearing what you guys are doing.


About the info I posted, it is available for every school. Just log into LSAC, go to "My School Lists", Click on an School you have added to your list that you want the info, on the right hand side click on "Law School Description", and then click on "ABA Law School Data".

For example... check out UVA, it lists 0 Mexican-American/Puerto Ricans but mentions 31 Hispanics enrolled. I have a hard time believing there isn't one Mexican-American at UVA.

[bk1]

Do what you have always done in regards to that question is my advice. Though, as I said before, technically, according to the census bureau, Hispanics are also white (or black, etc).

For the UVa data, that is probably because they reported Hispanic as a group without subdivisions.

[blackwater88]

Do what you have always done in regards to that question is my advice. Though, as I said before, technically, according to the census bureau, Hispanics are also white (or black, etc).

For the UVa data, that is probably because they reported Hispanic as a group without subdivisions.

Why is there no Mestizo option though?
I don't think I can consider myself white given that I also have indigenous blood in me.

[ArchRoark]

Do what you have always done in regards to that question is my advice. Though, as I said before, technically, according to the census bureau, Hispanics are also white (or black, etc).

For the UVa data, that is probably because they reported Hispanic as a group without subdivisions.

Why is there no Mestizo option though?
I don't think I can consider myself white given that I also have indigenous blood in me.

This. Or at least have an "Other" racial option as they do on the census.

Census 2010 Wiki

"Some other race. Includes all other responses not included in the 'White', 'Black or African American', 'American Indian and Alaska Native', 'Asian' and 'Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander' race categories described above. Respondents providing write-in entries such as multiracial, mixed, interracial, We-Sort, or a Hispanic/Latino group (for example, Mexican, Puerto Rican, or Cuban) in the "Some other race" category are included here."[12]

[Horchata]

If you look at the applications many of them ask "Are you Hispanic?" then ask to choose which race that describes you, with the options being White/Black/Asian/Pacific Islander/American Indian. I was confused when I first saw this on applications. Do I just leave the racial question blank? Or answer hispanic yes + white... Interested in hearing what you guys are doing.


About the info I posted, it is available for every school. Just log into LSAC, go to "My School Lists", Click on an School you have added to your list that you want the info, on the right hand side click on "Law School Description", and then click on "ABA Law School Data".

For example... check out UVA, it lists 0 Mexican-American/Puerto Ricans but mentions 31 Hispanics enrolled. I have a hard time believing there isn't one Mexican-American at UVA.

Thanks for the instructions how to get to the info. - I really appreciate it.

If that is the case, that probably helps any Mexican-Am. applicants this cycle. But who knows...

Do what you have always done in regards to that question is my advice. Though, as I said before, technically, according to the census bureau, Hispanics are also white (or black, etc).

For the UVa data, that is probably because they reported Hispanic as a group without subdivisions.

To me, it's weird that that is the case. For jury and political processes (i.e. gerrymandering) and government funds, Hispanics are not white or black, but a distinct category. The opinion in Hernandez v. Texas is very telling - I would encourage you all to read it. I don't understand how the govt. can (edit: have Hispanics regarded in different ways depending on the process), if this is really the case.

UVA can report how many MA/PR they have, but choose not to do so - which again I (and I am assuming we) have no idea why. I just looked on their application and there is a Chicano/Mexican box to choose.

[bk1]

Race and ethnicity are social constructs which are just now being accepted as so, with the former having many more racist assumptions around it thus the latter is becoming more favored. The mentality of the past few decades is that those of Hispanic ethnicity are, for the most part, white in regards to race. This is starting to change as many Hispanics and people in general no longer see a difference between race and ethnicity, they view it as a single term. Thus the AAA tried to push the Census Bureau to have the question solely asking race/ethnicity rather than one question about ethnicity, "Are you Hispanic/Latino/Spanish-descent?", and one about race, "What race(s) are you?". The Census Bureau obviously chose the latter for 2010, but that may change.

As things are in flux, and this is self-identification people should mark what they personally feel like they are. If you feel you are a Caucasian Hispanic, then check White and Hispanic. If you feel that Caucasian/White is a term that doesn't apply to you as a Hispanic, then check just Hispanic for yourself.

In regards to the question about Mestizos, I think this is a current weakness in the race/ethnicity question at the moment. Mestizos would be technically Hispanic/Native American/White, as the original Mestizos were Native American/White and their descendants are now Hispanic being from a Hispanic country. The problem arises that Native Americans are usually only considered to be, at least in law school admissions and other ethnicity questions, as tribes in the U.S. recognized by the government in some such way (thus NA applicants are asked for their tribal card as proof). However this does not extend to Native Americans outside of the U.S. (to my knowledge) so Mestizos, while they should check Native American because that is what they partially are, probably will not be seen as Native Americans in the sense that other NA's from federally recognized tribes are.

As to: Why does the government regard Hispanics differently? Because different bureaucracies handle things in different ways, simple as that. The government is not one cohesive entity. On top of that, this is an area that has been in constant flux thus different schools of thought abound.

[Pip]

Although schools say they want a class as diverse as the gen. pop. (as some schools specifically say this), they lump all minorities together w/o breaking it down by ethnicity, undermining their very statement.

Any time you see a school say they want a class as diverse as the general population I would suggest you write that school off as either being run by fools or liars.

It would be very hard for any school to get a mix that mirrored the general population since various cultures have different norms and being a lawyer isn't equally accepted as the proper thing to do within them. From Jewish friends I have there seems to be a near love affair with them hoping their kids become doctors or lawyers... in other cultures you don't find that. If you are trying to get an equal mix from various groups where some put very little value in what you are hoping to sell them (law school), then you would have to lower your standards to insane levels for some groups to the point that you are actually paying some people to attend. While schools lower their standards to a degree, they just don't lower them enough for specific groups to get a mirror image of society as a whole, and it isn't going to happen.

[Horchata]

To the last poster: That would make sense, but I can't think of any major minority group in the United States that does not highly regard the legal profession. If you mean every specific type of group within the U.S. - Samoans, Croatians, Russians, Germans, etc. - then, yeah, it won't be done. But I think the major groups - Hispanics, AA, Asian-Americans - regard it highly.

While schools lower their standards to a degree, they just don't lower them enough for specific groups to get a mirror image of society as a whole, and it isn't going to happen.

But, to be clear about what we are talking about, Mexican-Americans/Puerto Ricans/Cubans are the only group that makes this "image in society" goal incomplete. It is a mixture of low scores and low numbers of us wanting, or more importantly, (not) being able to go to law school. If it is the case, where a class of people in the U.S. are shut out of the legal world for various reasons - for lack of wanting, not being one of them - then that creates a problem. I think another big problem is that when schools do give an extra bump, it is already too late to make up for a very large achievement gap earlier in these students lives. I'm not saying there should be a boost in public high schools to give better grades, but more of a realization is that K-12 is where the problem starts and try to address it then, before it's too late. I know I benefited from these types of programs in high school and college.

Not trying to start a AA debate, but just providing a reason why the above poster's conclusion probably is correct, but not the for the reasons he/she gave.

[bk1]

Above quote is Pip, not me.

[Horchata]

That was weird.

[Horchata]

These are some of the more disturbing statistics I found on the LSAC website concerning Mexican-Americans in the T-20. Remember, this is a demographic that constitutes roughly 10 percent of the U.S. population. There are an awful lot of zeros.

Boston U - 1.2% Mex./Chic.
Cornell - 3
Duke - 0.8
Georgetown - 0.8
Penn - 0.9
NYU - 1.1
Univ. Indiana - 0.0
Michigan - 0.0
Vanderbilt - 0.0
U. Virginia - 0.0

At not one school in the T-20, are there any kind of statistics like this for African-American students. Just thought I'd throw this out there.

[Knock]

These are some of the more disturbing statistics I found on the LSAC website concerning Mexican-Americans in the T-20. Remember, this is a demographic that constitutes roughly 10 percent of the U.S. population. There are an awful lot of zeros.

Boston U - 1.2% Mex./Chic.
Cornell - 3
Duke - 0.8
Georgetown - 0.8
Penn - 0.9
NYU - 1.1
Univ. Indiana - 0.0
Michigan - 0.0
Vanderbilt - 0.0
U. Virginia - 0.0

At not one school in the T-20, are there any kind of statistics like this for African-American students. Just thought I'd throw this out there.

Wow. Was there any data for HYSCCN?

[rundoxierun]

These are some of the more disturbing statistics I found on the LSAC website concerning Mexican-Americans in the T-20. Remember, this is a demographic that constitutes roughly 10 percent of the U.S. population. There are an awful lot of zeros.

Boston U - 1.2% Mex./Chic.
Cornell - 3
Duke - 0.8
Georgetown - 0.8
Penn - 0.9
NYU - 1.1
Univ. Indiana - 0.0
Michigan - 0.0
Vanderbilt - 0.0
U. Virginia - 0.0

At not one school in the T-20, are there any kind of statistics like this for African-American students. Just thought I'd throw this out there.

As mentioned above.. the way Hispanics are noted on applications skews the data. Not all schools have a Mexican box along with their Hispanic box and some schools are just now adding it.

[Horchata]

Yale 2.4
Harvard 1.6
Stanford 8.6 <---- found all the Mexicans
Columbia 2.8
Chicago 3.6
NYU 1.1

As mentioned above.. the way Hispanics are noted on applications skews the data. Not all schools have a Mexican box along with their Hispanic box and some schools are just now adding it.

As you should have figured out....if the school lists the Mexican population greater than 0.1 percent, they calculate Mexicans as a specific category along with the Hispanic box. If they don't have a Mex. box, how could they have a statistic regarding this group? So that leaves 4 schools in the T-20 that apply to your argument. I know that UVA and Michigan had a Mexican box last cycle and do this cycle. So, at the least, UVA and Michigan didn't admit any Mexicans last year. I don't know about Vanderbilt and Indiana.

I don't know how you guys feel, but these are really shitty stats. Considering they (or we) are 10 percent of the U.S. population, it just shows how much work there still needs to be done.

Knockglock, if you want to do your own research, Tiva outlined the how to get this info. above. If you can't find it though, do this:

Add schools on LSAC to your list of schools.
Go to the School List, not pending.
Once on your list, click on the school and in the right hand corner there are two dark blue boxes. Choose "Law School Description"
A box will pop-up. Click "ABA Law School Data".

[Knock]

Yale 2.4
Harvard 1.6
Stanford 8.6 <---- found all the Mexicans
Columbia 2.8
Chicago 3.6
NYU 1.1

I wonder if that's good because it means Stanford likes Mexican-Americans and gives them a solid boost, or bad because they already have plenty of them. I hope it's the former!

[Horchata]

Yale 2.4
Harvard 1.6
Stanford 8.6 <---- found all the Mexicans
Columbia 2.8
Chicago 3.6
NYU 1.1

I wonder if that's good because it means Stanford likes Mexican-Americans and gives them a solid boost, or bad because they already have plenty of them. I hope it's the former!

pshhh Knockglock, your the type of applicant that's already in at Stanford, rendering me to the latter category. Be sure to take yourself off the waitlist if your in at Harvard!. Hopefully it works out for all of us.

[Knock]

Yale 2.4
Harvard 1.6
Stanford 8.6 <---- found all the Mexicans
Columbia 2.8
Chicago 3.6
NYU 1.1

I wonder if that's good because it means Stanford likes Mexican-Americans and gives them a solid boost, or bad because they already have plenty of them. I hope it's the former!

pshhh Knockglock, your the type of applicant that's already in the latter category. I'm hoping to be in the former category - however unrealistic it really is. Hopefully it works out for all of us!!

Hmm, I lost ya a bit there . But anyways, I hope it works out well for all of us too . Good luck on your cycle Horchata!

[Horchata]

haha I know...I read it again and didn't really understand what I said. It's edited now.

[Knock]

haha I know...I read it again and didn't really understand what I said. It's edited now.

Aww, thanks man . Good luck on your cycle, but i'm sure you will get into a great school that will be perfect for you!

[hijodehombre]

I don't know how you guys feel, but these are really shitty stats.

gacho stats

[Horchata]

I messed up with Michigan. This year they do not have a separate box for Mexicans.

I don't know how you guys feel, but these are really shitty stats.

gacho stats

Wey, gacho indeed

[bk1]

These are some of the more disturbing statistics I found on the LSAC website concerning Mexican-Americans in the T-20. Remember, this is a demographic that constitutes roughly 10 percent of the U.S. population. There are an awful lot of zeros.

Boston U - 1.2% Mex./Chic.
Cornell - 3
Duke - 0.8
Georgetown - 0.8
Penn - 0.9
NYU - 1.1
Univ. Indiana - 0.0
Michigan - 0.0
Vanderbilt - 0.0
U. Virginia - 0.0

At not one school in the T-20, are there any kind of statistics like this for African-American students. Just thought I'd throw this out there.

This was the whole point of my post and somewhere around the 10th post it was clear that these numbers are incorrect, probably due to the way it is reported. I highly doubt that UMich, UVa, and Vandy have not a single Mexican-American which makes the other numbers suspect to me.

[hijodehombre]

These are some of the more disturbing statistics I found on the LSAC website concerning Mexican-Americans in the T-20. Remember, this is a demographic that constitutes roughly 10 percent of the U.S. population. There are an awful lot of zeros.

Boston U - 1.2% Mex./Chic.
Cornell - 3
Duke - 0.8
Georgetown - 0.8
Penn - 0.9
NYU - 1.1
Univ. Indiana - 0.0
Michigan - 0.0
Vanderbilt - 0.0
U. Virginia - 0.0

At not one school in the T-20, are there any kind of statistics like this for African-American students. Just thought I'd throw this out there.

This was the whole point of my post and somewhere around the 10th post it was clear that these numbers are incorrect, probably due to the way it is reported. I highly doubt that UMich, UVa, and Vandy have not a single Mexican-American which makes the other numbers suspect to me.

I agree. Those zeros are suspect, but the other numbers Horchata puts up are consistent with the ABA LS Data, although Georgetown actually reports 0.6% Mexican-Americans and Cornell 3.4%. I suppose it's possible that some Mexican-Americans identify as Hispanic, and they are entitled to, but even then, Horchata's point is that the numbers are low. For example, at Georgetown, Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans and Hispanics combined account for 4.7%, African-Americans 8.6%.

[blackwater88]

Don't want to seem overly pessimistic, but I think it will just be frustrating to focus on those numbers right now, there really isn't much that we can do to change what's already happened. The best tool that we have to fight those stats is to support each other and strengthen those applications. Si nos unimos a huevo que hacemos la diferencia.

[bk1]

Don't want to seem overly pessimistic, but I think it will just be frustrating to focus on those numbers right now, there really isn't much that we can do to change what's already happened. The best tool that we have to fight those stats is to support each other and strengthen those applications. Si nos unimos a huevo que hacemos la diferencia.

I honestly don't care one way or another about the numbers because, as you noted, we can't significantly change what they are. I made this thread because I thought they were inaccurate (not having a single Mexican in 1000+ people seemed unlikely to me) and found out that indeed they were not accurate.