I'm hoping that wasn't directed at me. While I'm not getting into the politics of it, yes like it or not being an oppressed minority is very much going to help with your law school admissions. Much more so then being a white kid raised by a broke single mother, who's dad can't buy a pair of shoes, much less a dorm.
Ah yes, economics, studies have found that even among Blacks admitted to law school 89% are in the top economic strata, this mimics the overall economic segregation in elite law schools. (I unfortunately would fall into the 11%) Studies have also shown that economic based affirmatve action tends to lead to more racial diversity than simply race based affirmative action. So, yes I understand that there are poor White kids, and I do believe that Theo Huxtable shouldn't necessarily get a leg up over Opie, unless were talking about a school with literally no minorities. My point was that you made it sound like being Black was at the top of the list of unearned "advantages". (I would argue that if it wasn't earned it was certainly paid for). I was simply showing that having a parent who was a rich alumnus of a school I was applying to who could also make a massive donation is probably at the top of the list. Furthermore, every socioeconomic indicator shows that I would be more likely to be in that position if I were White (hence the use of race in my hypothetical.
That doesn't really justify anything. The percentage of rich white kids going to law schools with parents who also attended that law school, went on to make money, then later decided to leverage buying a dorm to assist their child might be 1%. The percentage of black law school applicants getting a boost is 100%. I would be willing to bet that the number of white students applying each cycle under the above conditions is significantly lower then the number of African American applicants. In other words, being black is almost certainly going to benefit you more then the slim chance of being in a tiny group of elite legacy white students.
That said, I support affirmative action, I just wish it was based on socioeconomic policy, not strictly pigmentation. Also, I never said anything about "unearned" or "unjustified" or "not paid for". I was merely commenting that dismissing your boost as an AA on the grounds that some white people are rich is crazy. The reality is there is NO better factor outside of your GPA and LSAT than your color, regardless of economic/educational opportunity. You would have to have done something very amazing for an EC to mean more then URM status.
I don't doubt that URM's face additional difficulties in education, score lower on the LSAT, or have less opportunity to high quality education. I just don't believe ONLY URM's face those difficulties. Like I said, I support AA, and if you faced difficulties as a result of your race that placed you at a disadvantage relative to the median white student, I support you getting a boost. If you went to private schools your whole life, were exposed to the same education and opportunities as white students, I don't believe you should get a boost.
Point being, if being black has been so rough your whole life (and it very well may have been) than you should embrace the URM boost , not dismiss it.
I wasn't saying that that incredibly rare circumstance justifies anything. I was simply pointing out that there are better things to be in the big scheme of law school admissions than Black.
The percentage of black law school applicants getting a boost is 100%. I would be willing to bet that the number of white students applying each cycle under the above conditions is significantly lower then the number of African American applicants. In other words, being black is almost certainly going to benefit you more then the slim chance of being in a tiny group of elite legacy white students.
If you're trying to argue that measure for measure it is better to be Black than White for the purpose of going to law school. That is a more abstract point than I would want to argue, simply look at the fact that 40% of White adults vs. 20% of Black adults have bachelor's degrees, the rest are not even in the running for law admissions period as well as massive wealth disparities.
Truly, there is no reason for us to be debating, we both agree with AA. I agree with you about Socioeconomic AA, that's why I mentioned the studies about it. The fact that 89% of Black law school students are well off means that the members of my community who were supposed to be helped by AA are being left out, it seems like socioeconomic AA might definitely help solve this problem in addition to increased equality in public schooling, while ensuring that a child of the Black bourgeoisie doens't knock out some kid from Appalachia. And btw, I am by no means dismissing the URM boost, I simply wanted to get an assesment which didn't factor it in. I fully intend to take advantage of it on my apps.
