Top Law Schools

As I occasionally peruse through LSN I have often notice that North Carolina Central often Rejects or Waitlists their best LSAT/GPA applicants while routinely accepting applicants with LSATs in the 140's and low 150's. What's the Deal? I know nothing about North Carolina Central but it almost seems that it happens way too often to be exclusively YP's, plus they don't seem to care about ranking(the only reason that schools seem to YP). So I propose once more WHAT ARE THEY DOING? I am really curious about this.

Everyone who has not made notice of what I am talking about please go check it out. It is really absurd to look at on LSN.

Maybe they go with the dartboard approach to acceptances

Maybe, they have rejected/waitlisted: One 168, two 161s, One 160, One 162. While Accepting: Five 140-145s. I really am curious about this. I know nothing about the school, am not an applicant, yet I am strangely bothered by this. Probably because if I was one of their 160+ applicants I would definitely be pissed.

I went and skimmed, but pretty much could have told you the reason without it....

Discrimination

The school is an HBCU, and many of those who were wait listed/rejected where not AA's.

Hmmm...Reverse Discrimination. Sounds like the situation the Supreme Court acknowledged in U Cal V. Bakke, in the majority opinion Powell wrote, "If petitioner's purpose is to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin, such a preferential purpose must be rejected...Prefering members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethinic origin is discrimination for its own sake. THIS THE CONSTITUTION FORBIDS"

Plus, I may be completely wrong about this but don't all HBCUs receive Government Aid? Thus, that would be state sanctioned discrimination. A big NO NO.

you are retarded if you think people who know your racist ways are going to believe you started this thread in ignorance

Jasper12 wrote:Hmmm...Reverse Discrimination. Sounds like the situation the Supreme Court acknowledged in U Cal V. Bakke, in the majority opinion Powell wrote, "If petitioner's purpose is to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin, such a preferential purpose must be rejected...Prefering members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethinic origin is discrimination for its own sake. THIS THE CONSTITUTION FORBIDS"

Don't see where the "reverse" comes into play. Obviously I understand what the term means, but I think discrimination is discrimination. I am however quite torn on this topic; I see the need for schools like this to continue their mission of providing higher education to African-Americans, but wonder if actively discriminating against others is somehow counter to that same mission.

neskerdoo wrote:you are retarded if you think people who know your racist ways are going to believe you started this thread in ignorance

Lol I also kinda figured Jasper knew that NCC was an HBCU....

My racist ways? Please elaborate.

HBCU?

hombredulce wrote:

Jasper12 wrote:Hmmm...Reverse Discrimination. Sounds like the situation the Supreme Court acknowledged in U Cal V. Bakke, in the majority opinion Powell wrote, "If petitioner's purpose is to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin, such a preferential purpose must be rejected...Prefering members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethinic origin is discrimination for its own sake. THIS THE CONSTITUTION FORBIDS"

Don't see where the "reverse" comes into play. Obviously I understand what the term means, but I think discrimination is discrimination. I am however quite torn on this topic; I see the need for schools like this to continue their mission of providing higher education to African-Americans, but wonder if actively discriminating against others is somehow counter to that same mission.

Here I bolded the quote explictly referring to reverse discrimination to make it easy for you to see where it comes into play.

Jasper12 wrote:My racist ways? Please elaborate.

I'd start with your 'tar.

SoxyPirate wrote:

Jasper12 wrote:My racist ways? Please elaborate.

I'd start with your 'tar.

Wow, that's a valid assumption Kanye West.

Jasper12 wrote:

hombredulce wrote:

Jasper12 wrote:Hmmm...Reverse Discrimination. Sounds like the situation the Supreme Court acknowledged in U Cal V. Bakke, in the majority opinion Powell wrote, "If petitioner's purpose is to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin, such a preferential purpose must be rejected...Prefering members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethinic origin is discrimination for its own sake. THIS THE CONSTITUTION FORBIDS"

Don't see where the "reverse" comes into play. Obviously I understand what the term means, but I think discrimination is discrimination. I am however quite torn on this topic; I see the need for schools like this to continue their mission of providing higher education to African-Americans, but wonder if actively discriminating against others is somehow counter to that same mission.

Here I bolded the quote explictly referring to reverse discrimination to make it easy for you to see where it comes into play.

Here I reddened the word that you may not understand. Where does Justice Powell explicitly refer to reverse discrimination? He's talking about discrimination, without mention of the discriminators or discriminatees.

DUMB!

Jasper12 wrote:

DUMB!

Also the funniest thing Mike Myers has been involved with this decade

hombredulce wrote:I went and skimmed, but pretty much could have told you the reason without it....

Discrimination

The school is an HBCU, and many of those who were wait listed/rejected where not AA's.

You do realize that the previous governor of NC was a central law grad, and that a good portion of their class is white right?

Jasper12 wrote:

hombredulce wrote:

Jasper12 wrote:Hmmm...Reverse Discrimination. Sounds like the situation the Supreme Court acknowledged in U Cal V. Bakke, in the majority opinion Powell wrote, "If petitioner's purpose is to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin, such a preferential purpose must be rejected...Prefering members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethinic origin is discrimination for its own sake. THIS THE CONSTITUTION FORBIDS"

Don't see where the "reverse" comes into play. Obviously I understand what the term means, but I think discrimination is discrimination. I am however quite torn on this topic; I see the need for schools like this to continue their mission of providing higher education to African-Americans, but wonder if actively discriminating against others is somehow counter to that same mission.

Here I bolded the quote explictly referring to reverse discrimination to make it easy for you to see where it comes into play.

Didnt mean I don't know what it is...in fact I went on to say that Discrimination is Discrimination PERIOD.

Virility wrote:

Jasper12 wrote:

hombredulce wrote:

Jasper12 wrote:Hmmm...Reverse Discrimination. Sounds like the situation the Supreme Court acknowledged in U Cal V. Bakke, in the majority opinion Powell wrote, "If petitioner's purpose is to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin, such a preferential purpose must be rejected...Prefering members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethinic origin is discrimination for its own sake. THIS THE CONSTITUTION FORBIDS"

Don't see where the "reverse" comes into play. Obviously I understand what the term means, but I think discrimination is discrimination. I am however quite torn on this topic; I see the need for schools like this to continue their mission of providing higher education to African-Americans, but wonder if actively discriminating against others is somehow counter to that same mission.

Here I bolded the quote explictly referring to reverse discrimination to make it easy for you to see where it comes into play.

Here I reddened the word that you may not understand. Where does Justice Powell explicitly refer to reverse discrimination? He's talking about discrimination, without mention of the discriminators or discriminatees.

Actually, by including the phrase "is discrimination FOR ITS OWN SAKE" he is explicitly referring the the fact that discriminating in favor of those who are often discriminated against is in fact discrimination. It's okay it does take close reading and a little bit of knowledge to understand this.

Put that in your apple and smoke it, BITCH.

dextermorgan wrote:

hombredulce wrote:I went and skimmed, but pretty much could have told you the reason without it....

Discrimination

The school is an HBCU, and many of those who were wait listed/rejected where not AA's.

You do realize that the previous governor of NC was a central law grad, and that a good portion of their class is white right?

I didn't know that...

Jasper12 wrote: Actually, by including the phrase "is discrimination FOR ITS OWN SAKE" he is explicitly referring the the fact that discriminating in favor of those who are often discriminated against is in fact discrimination. It's okay it does take close reading and a little bit of knowledge to understand this.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

--ImageRemoved--

Jasper12 wrote:--ImageRemoved--

just so, you know...