Admissions post Fisher ruling Forum

Share experiences and seek insight regarding your experience as an underrepresented minority within the legal community.
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."
User avatar
johnnysacks

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:13 am

Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by johnnysacks » Fri Sep 04, 2015 5:41 pm

delete
Last edited by johnnysacks on Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
johnnysacks

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:13 am

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by johnnysacks » Fri Sep 04, 2015 8:19 pm

delete
Last edited by johnnysacks on Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

theharveyspector

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue May 12, 2015 2:23 pm

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by theharveyspector » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:26 pm

Even so, URM would still be a factor that schools could consider.

User avatar
TheProdigal

Silver
Posts: 1026
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 4:33 pm

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by TheProdigal » Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:27 pm

I'm guessing that your best bet for any decent insight would be in Spivey's thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=197451

I'm sure this has been discussed within schools and adcoms, but I doubt any of the Deans who publicly post here are going to weigh in.

ac8876a

New
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:02 pm

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by ac8876a » Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:21 pm

BUMP!
But this ruling will not impact private schools at all, correct?

User avatar
johnnysacks

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:13 am

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by johnnysacks » Sat Sep 05, 2015 5:43 pm

delete
Last edited by johnnysacks on Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Person1111

Bronze
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 11:10 pm

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by Person1111 » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:01 pm

johnnysacks wrote:No way of knowing for sure. If the Court rules it violates the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection clause then it would be illegal to consider race in admissions meaning even private schools would be affected.
That's not true. The EPC doesn't apply to non-state actors and it doesn't prohibit private schools from using AA one way or the other.
Plus they take federal money too so it would definitely put them in a bind.
Not necessarily. Congress could certainly condition federal funding on eliminating affirmative action, just as it conditions federal funding on Title IX compliance now. And there might be a colorable argument that some forms of AA violate Title IX (a group of Asian-Americans is suing Harvard on this theory right now). But that has very little to do with the Constitution or what the Court does in Fisher.

Big Dog

Silver
Posts: 1205
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by Big Dog » Sat Sep 05, 2015 6:50 pm

A 173 [splitter] does extremely well in this current admissions environment. Harvard has a huge class and like all the top schools, would love to maintain its medians. Since there aren't enough 173's to go around with the other T14s' merit money, H needs to accept most of the 173's that apply.

Broncos15

Bronze
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:25 am

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by Broncos15 » Tue Sep 08, 2015 3:06 pm

Big Dog wrote:A 173 [splitter] does extremely well in this current admissions environment. Harvard has a huge class and like all the top schools, would love to maintain its medians. Since there aren't enough 173's to go around with the other T14s' merit money, H needs to accept most of the 173's that apply.
Harvard isn't generally splitter friendly, 3.6 is the current Non URM soft floor, although some 3.5X's do get in

Broncos15

Bronze
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:25 am

Re: Admissions post Fisher ruling

Post by Broncos15 » Tue Sep 08, 2015 3:13 pm

If SCOTUS sided with Fisher , does anyone here think schools would change towards admissions policies similar to Cal Berkeley where GPA's are favored more than LSAT's to increase the diversity.

( I have anecdotally heard this so take it with a grain of salt, but i have heard that Berk has its admissions policy set up that way since it bring in more diversity from URM candidates who are more likely to be reverse splitter 3.85/165 for example than a traditional splitter)

Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Underrepresented Law Students”