.
Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:50 pm
.
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=191191
flcath wrote:If you're black it certainly does.
.top30man wrote:What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.
Asian?helix23 wrote:Potential rationale being that over-representation may hurt chances?top30man wrote: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.top30man wrote:What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.
Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotasdingbat wrote:I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.top30man wrote:What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan
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 wrote:Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotasdingbat wrote:I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.top30man wrote:What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan
Huh, I wasn't aware of that update.flcath wrote: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 wrote:Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotasdingbat wrote:I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.top30man wrote:What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan
I'm diverse enough...JamMasterJ wrote:Michigan's "attempt to build a diverse class" is not the same as the law stating that they can't have race-based quotasdingbat wrote:I always refuse, because I don't think it should matter.top30man wrote:What is your potential rationale for doing this? It's not going to help you.
Too bad I didn't apply to Michigan
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 wrote:flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?
UM should just go private. It's essentially a private institution WRT funding anyway.flcath wrote: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 wrote:flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?
I would think so, otherwise U of M would have like no blax.JamMasterJ wrote:UM should just go private. It's essentially a private institution WRT funding anyway.flcath wrote: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 wrote:flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?
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?
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 wrote:I would think so, otherwise U of M would have like no blax.JamMasterJ wrote:UM should just go private. It's essentially a private institution WRT funding anyway.flcath wrote: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 wrote:flcath, are you referring to Grutter v Bollinger?
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?
"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."
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.)JamMasterJ wrote: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.
.tfleming09 wrote:I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.
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.helix23 wrote:lol I guess I was wondering if it's better to be implicitly or explicitly a white male...tfleming09 wrote:I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.
wrong forum, yes?flcath wrote: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.helix23 wrote:lol I guess I was wondering if it's better to be implicitly or explicitly a white male...tfleming09 wrote:I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.
Oh yeah, I forgot this board does admissions stuff.JamMasterJ wrote:wrong forum, yes?flcath wrote: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.helix23 wrote:lol I guess I was wondering if it's better to be implicitly or explicitly a white male...tfleming09 wrote:I think whenever you don't report they just put them in the "whatever, whitey" pile.