Re the Harvard admissions case - suppose the universities
continue their race quota policies, while denying this,
stating they respect the Supreme decision.

Is it enforceable? How would anyone know (or prove)
the difference, i.e. between conforming to the new
regime, vs. not conforming?

--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 7/3/2023 9:55 PM, RichD wrote:

Re the Harvard admissions case - suppose the universities
continue their race quota policies, while denying this,
stating they respect the Supreme decision.

Is it enforceable? How would anyone know (or prove)
the difference, i.e. between conforming to the new
regime, vs. not conforming?

--
Rich

A student who was discriminated against would file a civil suit with all
the subpoenas, depositions, etc.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

It appears that RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> said:

Re the Harvard admissions case - suppose the universities
continue their race quota policies, while denying this,
stating they respect the Supreme decision.

Near the end of the opinion, it says:

At the same time, as all parties agree, nothing in this opinion
should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an
applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it
through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.

So the universities can say we didn't admit this person because of her
race, we did because of how race affected her life. How could anyone
prove otherwise?

That's not necessarily a bad outcome. A whole lot of the minority
students at selective colleges are from high income families and
private schools, indistinguishable from the rest of the preppies on
the tennis team other than their ethnicity. If this forces them to
look for minority applicants who actually face racial and economic
barriers, that would be a lot more real diversity than now.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On July 3, Roy wrote:

Re the Harvard admissions case - suppose the universities
continue their race quota policies, while denying this,
stating they respect the Supreme decision.
Is it enforceable? How would anyone know (or prove)
the difference, i.e. between conforming to the new
regime, vs. not conforming?

A student who was discriminated against would file a civil suit with all
the subpoenas, depositions, etc.

Considering the nebulous, secretive nature of college admissions, especially
at the elite schools, how could a rejected applicant prove such a case?

--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"RichD" wrote in message news:f6c96e4c-5aa2-4e4b-8796-fef23453b074n@googlegroups.com...

On July 3, Roy wrote:

Re the Harvard admissions case - suppose the universities
continue their race quota policies, while denying this,
stating they respect the Supreme decision.
Is it enforceable? How would anyone know (or prove)
the difference, i.e. between conforming to the new
regime, vs. not conforming?

A student who was discriminated against would file a civil suit with all
the subpoenas, depositions, etc.

Considering the nebulous, secretive nature of college admissions,
especially
at the elite schools, how could a rejected applicant prove such a case?

--
Rich

I'm pretty sure a school like Harvard keeps very detailed records of applicants, including detailed demographic info on both accepted and
rejected applicants. All this info would surely be subpoened and turned
over in event of a lawsuit.

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On July 5, Rick wrote:

Re the Harvard admissions case - suppose the universities
continue their race quota policies, while denying this,
stating they respect the Supreme decision.
Is it enforceable? How would anyone know (or prove)
the difference, i.e. between conforming to the new
regime, vs. not conforming?

A student who was discriminated against would file a civil suit with all >>> the subpoenas, depositions, etc.

Considering the nebulous, secretive nature of college admissions,
especially at the elite schools, how could a rejected applicant prove such a case?

I'm pretty sure a school like Harvard keeps very detailed records of applicants, including detailed demographic info on both accepted and
rejected applicants. All this info would surely be subpoened and turned
over in event of a lawsuit.

The devil is in the details -

It's an invitation for every white and yellow rejected applicant to file.
Then Harvard says one was rejected because the orchestra doesn't
need another clarinetist, another because he didn't build enough
latrines in Zambia during his summers, and another because he got
caught placing a hidden microphone in the girls rest room.

So their sterling SAT and GPA scores weren't sufficient, and it isn't
race quotas, dammit!

This goes on for a while, finally the courts say enough is enough, and refuse to accept any further cases. And it's back to business as usual -


--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"RichD" wrote in message news:7073b43f-8659-44a3-bb46-54b0dfe0737fn@googlegroups.com...

On July 5, Rick wrote:

Re the Harvard admissions case - suppose the universities
continue their race quota policies, while denying this,
stating they respect the Supreme decision.
Is it enforceable? How would anyone know (or prove)
the difference, i.e. between conforming to the new
regime, vs. not conforming?

A student who was discriminated against would file a civil suit with
all
the subpoenas, depositions, etc.

Considering the nebulous, secretive nature of college admissions,
especially at the elite schools, how could a rejected applicant prove
such a case?

I'm pretty sure a school like Harvard keeps very detailed records of
applicants, including detailed demographic info on both accepted and
rejected applicants. All this info would surely be subpoened and turned
over in event of a lawsuit.

The devil is in the details -

It's an invitation for every white and yellow rejected applicant to file. >Then Harvard says one was rejected because the orchestra doesn't
need another clarinetist, another because he didn't build enough
latrines in Zambia during his summers, and another because he got
caught placing a hidden microphone in the girls rest room.

So their sterling SAT and GPA scores weren't sufficient, and it isn't
race quotas, dammit!

This goes on for a while, finally the courts say enough is enough, and
refuse
to accept any further cases. And it's back to business as usual -

--
Rich

But the premise of your question is suppose Harvard just keeps up their practice of race quotas, and I don't think they will do that. Roberts gave them a big out by saying you can't use race per se as an admissions
criterion, but there is nothing to say that students can't write about their racial experiences in their admission essays, and it's certainly fair game
for the university to give weight to how well written or how insightful
those essays are. I think this might give them a backdoor way to work race
in as an admission factor without basing it on an actual quota.

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On July 5, Rick wrote:

But the premise of your question is suppose Harvard just keeps up their practice of race quotas, and I don't think they will do that. Roberts gave them a big out by saying you can't use race per se as an admissions criterion, but there is nothing to say that students can't write about their racial experiences in their admission essays, and it's certainly fair game for the university to give weight to how well written or how insightful
those essays are. I think this might give them a backdoor way to work race
in as an admission factor without basing it on an actual quota.

WSJ ran a column yesterday, on the methods available to
the colleges to continue their race admission policies.  The
opionionator has first hand experience in admission offices.

Now, what if a future Congress decides to override the Harvard
decision?  "All schools receiving federal aid shall make good faith
effort to produce a student population ethnically representative of
the community, statistically."

Then the court's decision is void?

--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote in news:6f6f85b8-35d0-4562-8fda-cbf58ef225a3n@googlegroups.com:

On July 5, Rick wrote:

But the premise of your question is suppose Harvard just keeps up
their practice of race quotas, and I don't think they will do that.
Roberts gave them a big out by saying you can't use race per se as an
admissions criterion, but there is nothing to say that students can't
write about their racial experiences in their admission essays, and
it's certainly fair game for the university to give weight to how
well written or how insightful those essays are. I think this might
give them a backdoor way to work race in as an admission factor
without basing it on an actual quota.

WSJ ran a column yesterday, on the methods available to
the colleges to continue their race admission policies.  The
opionionator has first hand experience in admission offices.

Now, what if a future Congress decides to override the Harvard
decision?  "All schools receiving federal aid shall make good faith
effort to produce a student population ethnically representative of
the community, statistically."

Then the court's decision is void?

No, Congress can't normally overrule the Supreme Court with respect to constitutional issues. Sometimes when the Court makes a ruling based on
a statute, Congress can weigh in.


--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"RichD" wrote in message news:6f6f85b8-35d0-4562-8fda-cbf58ef225a3n@googlegroups.com...

On July 5, Rick wrote:

But the premise of your question is suppose Harvard just keeps up their
practice of race quotas, and I don't think they will do that. Roberts
gave
them a big out by saying you can't use race per se as an admissions
criterion, but there is nothing to say that students can't write about
their
racial experiences in their admission essays, and it's certainly fair
game
for the university to give weight to how well written or how insightful
those essays are. I think this might give them a backdoor way to work
race
in as an admission factor without basing it on an actual quota.

WSJ ran a column yesterday, on the methods available to
the colleges to continue their race admission policies. Â The
opionionator has first hand experience in admission offices.

Now, what if a future Congress decides to override the Harvard
decision? Â "All schools receiving federal aid shall make good faith
effort to produce a student population ethnically representative of
the community, statistically."

Then the court's decision is void?

--
Rich

No, I think the only way this could be overridden would be through a constitutional amendment.

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 7/10/2023 10:51 AM, RichD wrote:

WSJ ran a column yesterday, on the methods available to
the colleges to continue their race admission policies.  The
opionionator has first hand experience in admission offices.

Now, what if a future Congress decides to override the Harvard
decision?  "All schools receiving federal aid shall make good faith
effort to produce a student population ethnically representative of
the community, statistically."

Then the court's decision is void?

That would probably run into the 14th Amendment:
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the
State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That "equal protection" is often interpreted as meaning that the
government (all levels) cannot discriminate between people on the basis
of race, religion, skin color, etc.

--
I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)