# Affirmative action in the Supreme Court again **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 24, 2012, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792 "2012-02-24T02:14:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/1 "2012-02-24T02:14:24Z")
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Fisher v. Texas, a major case involving affirmative action in higher education. The decision in this case could end racial preferences in admissions — moving up the timetable from the justices’ 2003 ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger, which said, “The court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary.” Is it time for colleges and universities to move past race? How can we tell when race-based preferences are no longer necessary? Personally, I agree with Professor Steve Hsu’s [comments in the NY Times](http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/02/22/beyond-race-in-affirmative-action/merit-not-race-in-college-admissions). SAT results predict performance and should be the main criterion, race shouldn’t come into it. Also, as Hsu notes on his blog graduation rates for underrepresented minorities [improved significantly](http://seaphe.org/pdf/analysisoftheeffectsofproposition209.pdf)after Prop 209 (requiring race blind admissions) went into effect. > [@](#): > > Graduation trends. URM graduation rates have improved sharply since Prop 209 went into effect. For the six cohorts of black freshmen who started at UC campuses before Prop 209 went into effect (the matriculating years of 1992 through 1997), the average 4-year graduation rate was only 22.2%. For the years since 1998 (matriculating years 1998 through 2005), the black 4-year graduation rate across the UC system is 39.4% – a near doubling. For Hispanics the 4-year graduation numbers are 27.2% for 1992-97, and 41.8% for 1998-2005. Six year graduation rates have risen as well, though less dramatically. Combined with the matriculation trends described above, the number of black and Hispanics graduating from the UC system has been rising steadily and remarkably. For example, the number of black students who matriculated at UC campuses in 2005 and graduated in 2009 was over two-and-a-half times higher than the number of blacks who earned 4-year degrees annually in the early 1990s." (from working paper by Richard H. Sander, UCLA) ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/2 "2012-02-24T02:27:44Z")
I agree with Justice Roberts that “[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/3 "2012-02-24T03:23:43Z")
I’m really not surprised by the comments on that blog, given it’s the NYT’s. Anyway, it’s long-overdue that affirmative action should be axed when it comes to who gets in to college and who doesn’t. This whole “promoting diversity” line is just a bunch of BS, as it assumes “diverse” means “from a different race”, when the two aren’t necessarily the same. (And on another note, I can already hear the screeches directed towards Thomas who will undoubtedly rule against the school.) ETA: One thing I’ve never understood is this idea that minorities need affirmative action to get ahead. Someone is going to have to explain that one to me. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/4 "2012-02-24T03:45:00Z")
Geez, Omg, you want some well with that poison? ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/5 "2012-02-24T03:52:51Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > ETA: One thing I’ve never understood is this idea that minorities need affirmative action to get ahead. Someone is going to have to explain that one to me. Nobody has ever argued that minorities “need” affirmative action to get ahead, but have pointed out that affirmative action(as the term is currently understood) is a good way to try and right past wrongs, ensure diversity, and to try and make up for the barriers certain groups and people face. Moreover, whites are the main beneficiaries of Affirmative Action. Admittedly, that is not as remotely true as when whites were massively benefitted by Affirmative Action long before LBJ signed that into law and when it was known by other terms. > [@](#): > > (And on another note, I can already hear the screeches directed towards Thomas who will undoubtedly rule against the school.) I’m reminded of a speech by America’s most famous and influential black conservative. [(And on another note, I can already hear the screeches directed towards Thomas who will undoubtedly rule against the school.)]((And on another note, I can already hear the screeches directed towards Thomas who will undoubtedly rule against the school.)) ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/6 "2012-02-24T03:59:10Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Moreover, whites are the main beneficiaries of Affirmative Action. You can’t just make an assertion like this without explaining yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/7 "2012-02-24T04:13:48Z")
> [@Mosier](#): > > You can’t just make an assertion like this without explaining yourself. White women have been the main beneficiaries of Affirmative Action. [http://www.theroot.com/views/real-affirmative-action-babies](http://www.theroot.com/views/real-affirmative-action-babies) ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/8 "2012-02-24T04:49:05Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > I agree with Justice Roberts that “[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” Yet it’s alright for the government to perform a census on race and then use that data to gerrymander the minority vote into non-existence. While the 2010 Census devotes 2 out 10 questions probing for ethnicity, there isn’t even one question that asks whether the person is an American citizen or whether they were born in the United States. So much for a census of priorities. If you’re in California, a welfare applicant, and you don’t put down your ethnicity - a government bureaucrat will record one for you. The same occurs in the criminal justice system. If you’ve recently taken the SAT or GRE, you’ll notice that the one of the first questions you are asked on the test - surprise, surprise - is your race: how’s that for [stereotype threat](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat) before taking the exam? If the government wants to help stop racism, it can start by stop asking minorities to cough up their racial identity at every road-bend and encourage colleges, universities, and private companies to do the same. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/9 "2012-02-24T14:57:56Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Nobody has ever argued that minorities “need” affirmative action to get ahead, but have pointed out that affirmative action(as the term is currently understood) is a good way to try and right past wrongs, ensure diversity, and to try and make up for the barriers certain groups and people face. How does discriminating against Asians now right the wrong of past discrimination of Black people? If a black person stole something from my father, does me stealing something from an unrelated black person right that wrong? Of course not, two wrongs do not make a right. If it is necessary to discriminate to ensure diversity doesn’t that mean that without the discrimination there would not be enought black and latinos at the colleges? Is this because college admission departments are secretly hot beds of rascism who are just chomping at the bit to deny admission to qualified minorities? Or is it because proponents of the diversity rationale think that black and latino people are so inherently inferior that the only way they would be admitted is by discrimination? If we are trying to make up for barriers certain people face aren’t there better ways than assuming all blacks and latinos are alike and need similar help? Why not target the help to individuals instead of assuming the Will Smith’s kids will need help over a first generation american whose parents barely speak English? ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/10 "2012-02-24T15:10:40Z")
The thread on university discrimination isn’t that old. ---
**Author:** ![FixMyIgnorance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7feea3/32.png) [@FixMyIgnorance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FixMyIgnorance)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/11 "2012-02-24T15:17:23Z")
> **[In Praise Of Holistic Admissions | MIT Admissions](https://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/in-praise-of-holistic-admissions/)** > > not an admissions machine > [@](#): > > When we say that we have a holistic admissions process it essentially means that our admissions process takes into account many different factors, and that we understand that it is the interaction of these myriad factors which constitutes the applicant. We deploy “holistic” to differentiate against admissions systems which only consider so-called “objective academic data” (and I am air-quoting so hard I might sprain a knuckle) in their admissions process. > > Sometimes, holistic academic processes are criticized as being misguided. “Academic merit”, it is suggested, should be the sole dispositive factor controlling the admissions process. > > Suppose, for a moment, we didn’t have a holistic process. Suppose that we wanted to build an application system around “merit”, defined, as it always seems to be, by test scores and grades. (I’d certainly contest this definition, but will concede it here for the sake of argument). > > We could build a working admissions system around this premise. A very simple version might look something like this: create an index by multiplying SAT score and GPA. Rank-order the list by the highest product of the two, admit the top 1,000 students automatically and deny the rest. > > Would this really be a better admissions process? Well, I guess I could go home pretty early to get a full night’s rest after turning on the Admissions Machine the day after applications are due. Then again, I’d probably not sleep very well if this is all I did. And the students we admitted wouldn’t feel as home here. Because what we try to do is build a community, and an admissions machine cannot produce a community. It can only produce a bunch of test scores and GPAs crammed into classrooms. > > Even worse, such a system would produce a very thin slice of the population, because the segment of students perched atop the SATs are a comparatively homogenous bunch. SAT scores are strongly correlated with parent income, and parent income is strongly correlated with their parent’s income. Now obviously there are many factors at play here, but the trend is clear: the (multigenerationally) wealthier you are, the higher you score. All of this is to say that, if scores were all we cared about, our campus would be overwhelmingly socioeconomically similar. > > That’s limiting. It’s limiting because of the scope of issues and problems which people have experienced, and it’s limiting because of the solutions which are likely to come to the minds of people. In short, it lends itself to group think and experential echo chambers. At that point, it’s not a college as a socializing institution: it’s a Great Gatsby garden party. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/12 "2012-02-24T16:19:07Z")
Assuming that MIT guy is correct, what result from weighting SAT scores according to household income? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/13 "2012-02-24T16:28:17Z")
I can only hope that I live to see the day when this scourge of legal discrimination based on race is finally wiped from our society. This is the best chance we have had so far. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/14 "2012-02-24T16:37:54Z")
That was a joke, right? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/15 "2012-02-24T16:46:39Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > That was a joke, right? Not at all. I find it offensive that some people have jobs/spots at a university because of the color of their skin, and that this is not only allowed by the government, but done at the hands of the government. Yeah, I know white people benefited before. That was wrong, too. Let’s learn from that and not do it anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/16 "2012-02-24T16:53:31Z")
White people benefited from institutional racism before. White people _continue to benefit_ from institutional racism. One of the problematic things about institutional racism is that even if you could stamp it out in a generation, you cannot (by definition) stamp out its effects in one. To think otherwise is naive. ---
**Author:** ![FixMyIgnorance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7feea3/32.png) [@FixMyIgnorance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FixMyIgnorance)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/17 "2012-02-24T16:57:14Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Not at all. I find it offensive that some people have jobs/spots at a university because of the color of their skin, and that this is not only allowed by the government, but done at the hands of the government. > > Yeah, I know white people benefited before. That was wrong, too. Let’s learn from that and not do it anymore. It isn’t nearly this simple. You can’t just say “Welp we should stop doing it now.” That doesn’t suddenly fix the damage overnight or level the playing field to a more equitable system. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/18 "2012-02-24T17:03:05Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > If the government wants to help stop racism, it can start by stop asking minorities to cough up their racial identity at every road-bend and encourage colleges, universities, and private companies to do the same. Fun anecdote: I used to work in a graduate admissions office for a large state university. A few years before I joined the staff some clever person decided that the best way to avoid discriminating by race was not to ask for people’s race. Which was all very well and good – unless the gummint wanted to check the admissions statistics to see if any discrimination was taking place. Of course the university didn’t have the data because they hadn’t been tracking race of applicants, and all heck broke loose. So they went back to asking. You can’t have it both ways. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/19 "2012-02-24T17:11:10Z")
Just out of curiosity, what do the members of the board think about a completely blind college admissions policy? For example if all we knew about a candidate was their SSN, or perhaps a random string associated with the SSN? Admission based upon academic performance and academic performance alone. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792/20 "2012-02-24T17:37:20Z")
It’s still on page 1 zoid. > **[Harvard and Princeton Targeted in U.S. Asian-American Discrimination Probe](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=640758)** > > http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-02/harvard-targeted-in-u-s-asian-american-discrimination-probe.html The department’s Office for Civil Rights is investigating a complaint it received in August that Harvard rejected an Asian- American candidate... [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-in-the-supreme-court-again/613792.md?page=2)