. Forum

[helix23]

.

[flcath]

If you're black it certainly does.

[top30man]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

[No13baby]

If you're white or Asian, it makes no difference. Men and women are about equally represented in law schools anyway, so I don't think gender changes anything either.

There's no reason not to report.

[2014]

If you're black it certainly does.

[helix23]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

.

[JamMasterJ]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

Potential rationale being that over-representation may hurt chances?

Asian?

It's fine either way.

[rinkrat19]

They just assume you're white if you don't specify. So if you're white or Asian, it doesn't make a difference. If you're URM or some other ethnicity, then you might hurt yourself to varying degrees. (More for the 3 URM categories, obv)

Being Asian doesn't hurt in the case of law school, as Asians aren't as overrepresented as they are in undergrad.

Gender's not much of an issue. Women are slightly underrepresented, but not enough to matter on your apps.

[dingbat]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan

[CanadianWolf]

Might help as it allows the office clerks to fill in the missing blanks.

[JamMasterJ]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan

Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotas

[flcath]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan

Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotas

My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that, subsequent to the SCOTUS decision you're referencing, Michigan amended its state constitution to outlaw any AA on the part of U of M.

[JamMasterJ]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan

Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotas

My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that, subsequent to the SCOTUS decision you're referencing, Michigan amended its state constitution to outlaw any AA on the part of U of M.

Huh, I wasn't aware of that update.
Their LSN charts of URM only vs URM excluded create some pretty big questions if this is the case.

[dingbat]

What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.

I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan

Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotas

I'm diverse enough...

[JamMasterJ]

flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?

[flcath]

flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?

Yup, ty. (I wasn't going to look it up myself; I get on TLS during the day to avoid doing legal research.) Prop. 2, under the "Law adopted post-case" section of the Wikipeida article, was what I was specifically referring to.

[JamMasterJ]

flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?

Yup, ty. (I wasn't going to look it up myself; I get on TLS during the day to avoid doing legal research.) Prop. 2, under the "Law adopted post-case" section of the Wikipeida article, was what I was specifically referring to.

UM should just go private. It's essentially a private institution WRT funding anyway.

I wonder how explicitly this overturn rules out using race i.e. can they couch it by calling someone a "well-rounded candidate" rather than using a race-related term?

[flcath]

flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?

Yup, ty. (I wasn't going to look it up myself; I get on TLS during the day to avoid doing legal research.) Prop. 2, under the "Law adopted post-case" section of the Wikipeida article, was what I was specifically referring to.

UM should just go private. It's essentially a private institution WRT funding anyway.

I wonder how explicitly this overturn rules out using race i.e. can they couch it by calling someone a "well-rounded candidate" rather than using a race-related term?

I would think so, otherwise U of M would have like no blax.

"Let's see, I can either go to HYS, CCN at half-price, or UVa/Penn with a full-ride . . . or Michigan at sticker price."

[JamMasterJ]

flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?

Yup, ty. (I wasn't going to look it up myself; I get on TLS during the day to avoid doing legal research.) Prop. 2, under the "Law adopted post-case" section of the Wikipeida article, was what I was specifically referring to.

UM should just go private. It's essentially a private institution WRT funding anyway.

I wonder how explicitly this overturn rules out using race i.e. can they couch it by calling someone a "well-rounded candidate" rather than using a race-related term?

I would think so, otherwise U of M would have like no blax.

"Let's see, I can either go to HYS, CCN at half-price, or UVa/Penn with a full-ride . . . or Michigan at sticker price."

right, because URMs that would be admitted without scholarships at M are basically locked into schollies at better schools. They would be completely out of the competition for creating a diverse class. A 167/3.9 AA male certainly has better options than Michigan at sticker.

[flcath]

right, because URMs that would be admitted without scholarships at M are basically locked into schollies at better schools. They would be completely out of the competition for creating a diverse class. A 167/3.9 AA male certainly has better options than Michigan at sticker.

I think your initial idea was right. They probably just do AA and lie and say it's something else. (Which isn't a bad thing. I'm pro-AA and, even if I weren't, it'd be very difficult to be the *only* LS not to do it.)

[helix23]

I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.

.

[flcath]

I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.

lol I guess I was wondering if it's better to be implicitly or explicitly a white male...

The people who handle this data aren't the same people who make your hiring decisions. A lot of times it comes in a totally separate email, sometimes after you've been rejected.

[JamMasterJ]

I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.

lol I guess I was wondering if it's better to be implicitly or explicitly a white male...

The people who handle this data aren't the same people who make your hiring decisions. A lot of times it comes in a totally separate email, sometimes after you've been rejected.

wrong forum, yes?

[flcath]

I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.

lol I guess I was wondering if it's better to be implicitly or explicitly a white male...

The people who handle this data aren't the same people who make your hiring decisions. A lot of times it comes in a totally separate email, sometimes after you've been rejected.

wrong forum, yes?

Oh yeah, I forgot this board does admissions stuff.