Justice department sues Yale for illegal discrimination based on race

[RINO Tom]

why tf do u even have to put ur race and sex and sh**t on like, college applications.

it's just how the man keeps us down and believing in lies like race

PREACH!

[S019]

Always questionable and curious when people choose to start caring about "discrimination".

Are Asian-americans not deserving of equal treatment?

So, as an Asian-American, I think affirmative action is a good thing, because it allows underprivileged minorities to get ahead. I would prefer that it would be reformed to also benefit Asians, who have also struggled in this nation for a while. But I can't support this lawsuit, because the end result is that this will end up benefitting white people far more than Asians, and minorities will once again be shafted. Affirmative action exists to benefit minorities, and yes while it usually doesn't benefit Asians, that's not a reason to throw it out, instead that's a way to push it to benefit all minorities, yet as I already said minorities will get shafted by this lawsuit, and white people will benefit.

By definition, you can't "reform affirmative action to also benefit Asians." Asians don't need affirmative action; that's why they make up such disproportionate percentages of students at so many elite institutions even despite affirmative action laws.

He wants to keep acting woke but also boost his chances in college lol.

No, I just think every group except white people is underprivileged and needs help from the government. Asians are still much, much worse off than white people in general, and college admissions should account for that.

[Saint Milei]

Always questionable and curious when people choose to start caring about "discrimination".

Are Asian-americans not deserving of equal treatment?

So, as an Asian-American, I think affirmative action is a good thing, because it allows underprivileged minorities to get ahead. I would prefer that it would be reformed to also benefit Asians, who have also struggled in this nation for a while. But I can't support this lawsuit, because the end result is that this will end up benefitting white people far more than Asians, and minorities will once again be shafted. Affirmative action exists to benefit minorities, and yes while it usually doesn't benefit Asians, that's not a reason to throw it out, instead that's a way to push it to benefit all minorities, yet as I already said minorities will get shafted by this lawsuit, and white people will benefit.

By definition, you can't "reform affirmative action to also benefit Asians." Asians don't need affirmative action; that's why they make up such disproportionate percentages of students at so many elite institutions even despite affirmative action laws.

He wants to keep acting woke but also boost his chances in college lol.

No, I just think every group except white people is underprivileged and needs help from the government. Asians are still much, much worse off than white people in general, and college admissions should account for that.

[Kamala's side hoe]

Interesting how Asians are considered to be "privileged" even though they have the highest poverty rate in NYC.

These things really need to be handled on a case-by-case basis. Widespread disaggregation of "Asian" by national origin, ethnicity, and income level would be helpful.

Interesting how Asians are considered to be "privileged" even though they have the highest poverty rate in NYC.

You guys don't care about people in poverty anyway. This is a classic yellow avatar race-baiting thread.

If Yale was promoting the applications of African-American and Hispanic students to the exclusion of impoverished Americans of Vietnamese, Cambodian, etc descent that your HuffPost article is highlighting, then this might have merit. I doubt that was the case here. The point of affirmative action is to help underserved groups get a footing in career tracks they previously haven't been able to. So that would mean you would prefer that application to groups who are already well-established. Given the fact that America's universities are already representative to a disproportionate degree with Chinese, Indian, Japanese, and Korean students, plus academic tourists from those countries (especially China) that would include them as well.

AAPI Americans and foreign nationals are counted separately in campus profile reports... And treating them as if they're interchangeable contributes to the perception of Asian Americans as "perpetual foreigners".

Also- if we use median household income as a proxy for general affluence, Chinese Americans are below the AAPI average, while Vietnamese Americans are close to the same level as Korean Americans. So not particularly well-off on average, but not really equivalent to Cambodian and Hmong Americans either.

[Kamala's side hoe]

Always questionable and curious when people choose to start caring about "discrimination".

Are Asian-americans not deserving of equal treatment?

So, as an Asian-American, I think affirmative action is a good thing, because it allows underprivileged minorities to get ahead. I would prefer that it would be reformed to also benefit Asians, who have also struggled in this nation for a while. But I can't support this lawsuit, because the end result is that this will end up benefitting white people far more than Asians, and minorities will once again be shafted. Affirmative action exists to benefit minorities, and yes while it usually doesn't benefit Asians, that's not a reason to throw it out, instead that's a way to push it to benefit all minorities, yet as I already said minorities will get shafted by this lawsuit, and white people will benefit.

By definition, you can't "reform affirmative action to also benefit Asians." Asians don't need affirmative action; that's why they make up such disproportionate percentages of students at so many elite institutions even despite affirmative action laws.

He wants to keep acting woke but also boost his chances in college lol.

No, I just think every group except white people is underprivileged and needs help from the government. Asians are still much, much worse off than white people in general, and college admissions should account for that.

I agree with your general point that most Asian students aren't really affected by affirmative action, and that many Asian applicants benefit from holistic admissions. But I'm not sure how tweaking college admissions in favor of a certain racial/ethnic group by itself is supposed to help solve structural problems in certain communities, or take down white supremacy.

I'm not disputing your point that AsAms are disadvantaged overall; I'm asking how and why the affluent Asians from better educated backgrounds should acquiesce to the status quo when they don't have anything super obvious to gain from it.

[Alcibiades]

The fact that it is so difficult for Asian Americans to get into top colleges is a bit iffy, but it is not African-Americans who are being admitted at their expense. It is white kids whose parents are donors or who are legacy. If such practices occurred at the top British universities there would be widespread outrage. This is the negative side of having a large number of private universities; in the UK virtually all are public.

[jaichind]

Couple of thoughts

1) Yale is a private institution and should be allowed set its admissions polices as it sees fit and the government should no business getting involved  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

2) Taking the Asian angle, I feel there are quite rational reasons for Yale not to want a large over-representations of Asians on campus.  Asians, especially Orientals, tend to give to their alma mater at a much lower rate than Whites.  Asians, especially Orientals, tend not to make it to the apex of business and industry (mostly for cultural reasons in my view), so if Yale had a large number of Asians in its class their Alumni will have less wealth, power, and influence versus a counterfactual world.  It is and should be all about money and Yale should be free to maximize its wealth, power and influence as it sees fit without the government getting in the way.

[Crane]

Always questionable and curious when people choose to start caring about "discrimination".

Are Asian-americans not deserving of equal treatment?

So, as an Asian-American, I think affirmative action is a good thing, because it allows underprivileged minorities to get ahead. I would prefer that it would be reformed to also benefit Asians, who have also struggled in this nation for a while. But I can't support this lawsuit, because the end result is that this will end up benefitting white people far more than Asians, and minorities will once again be shafted. Affirmative action exists to benefit minorities, and yes while it usually doesn't benefit Asians, that's not a reason to throw it out, instead that's a way to push it to benefit all minorities, yet as I already said minorities will get shafted by this lawsuit, and white people will benefit.

By definition, you can't "reform affirmative action to also benefit Asians." Asians don't need affirmative action; that's why they make up such disproportionate percentages of students at so many elite institutions even despite affirmative action laws.

He wants to keep acting woke but also boost his chances in college lol.

No, I just think every group except white people is underprivileged and needs help from the government. Asians are still much, much worse off than white people in general, and college admissions should account for that.

[Crane]

Interesting how Asians are considered to be "privileged" even though they have the highest poverty rate in NYC.

These things really need to be handled on a case-by-case basis. Widespread disaggregation of "Asian" by national origin, ethnicity, and income level would be helpful.

Interesting how Asians are considered to be "privileged" even though they have the highest poverty rate in NYC.

You guys don't care about people in poverty anyway. This is a classic yellow avatar race-baiting thread.

If Yale was promoting the applications of African-American and Hispanic students to the exclusion of impoverished Americans of Vietnamese, Cambodian, etc descent that your HuffPost article is highlighting, then this might have merit. I doubt that was the case here. The point of affirmative action is to help underserved groups get a footing in career tracks they previously haven't been able to. So that would mean you would prefer that application to groups who are already well-established. Given the fact that America's universities are already representative to a disproportionate degree with Chinese, Indian, Japanese, and Korean students, plus academic tourists from those countries (especially China) that would include them as well.

AAPI Americans and foreign nationals are counted separately in campus profile reports... And treating them as if they're interchangeable contributes to the perception of Asian Americans as "perpetual foreigners".

Also- if we use median household income as a proxy for general affluence, Chinese Americans are below the AAPI average, while Vietnamese Americans are close to the same level as Korean Americans. So not particularly well-off on average, but not really equivalent to Cambodian and Hmong Americans either.

Good point. As discussed earlier, I think it's probably better to look at the student's individual history when making these decisions.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

https://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2002/06/affirmative-action-and-college-graduation-rates/

The real issue, however, is not how highly ranked the institutions are, but how big the racial difference in admissions standards has been. This they never tell us, despite mountains of statistics on everything else. From other studies, however, it is clear that racial differences in SAT scores, for example, are much smaller at Harvard (95 points) than at Duke (184 points) or Rice (271 points).

In other words, where the racial preferences in admissions are not as great, the differences in graduation rates are not as great. The critics of affirmative action were right: Racial preferences reduce the prospects of black students graduating. Other data tell the same story.

Thomas Sowell also has a bottom line to this:

In short, it is not the relative rankings of the institutions but the racial differential in admissions standards that has been crucial. You are not doing anybody a favor by sending them where they are more likely to fail, rather than where they are more likely to succeed. Critics of racial preferences and quotas have been saying that for more than 30 years, and now the data back them up — which may be why you don’t hear much about those data.

Imagine being accepted to an expensive school through Affirmative Action, not being able to keep up, and flunking out with a significant chunk of student debt.  Imagine how miserable you'd be on the way to flunking out.

Not every AA student flunks out, but the rate IS significantly higher.  Dr. Sowell has pointed out that the top schools are teaching to kids at the 99th percentile of the SAT and presenting material at that rate.  Is this development really surprising, given the differential in entrance criteria.

Lord knows that black folks in America have suffered unique injustices; injustices that have been different, harsher, and more pervasive, than any other "marginalized" group.  There IS a place for Affirmative Action in society and Affirmative Action is a step that has been necessary because there has been a time not too long ago when people would only be fair if the heavy hand of government forced fairness on them. 

But the place to remedy this is probably not the Ivy Leagues.  The issues of the quality of education black children receive is legitimate, but Yale is not the place to remediate those problems.  Setting up people to fail to "feel good" about yourself is what this sort of Affirmative Action really is, and it is really rather cruel in the end.  Yes, many students can leave Yale and go to, say, your local community college (where you can now get a 4 year degree in FL) or get an AA and then transfer to a place like, say, Florida Atlantic University.  What happens when such a person becomes so disheartened that they don't finish undergrad at all?

[Badger]

  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

Jaichind at job interview in 1963 .

 Interviewer -- "So solly, Chinaman! We don't hire your type here!"

Jaichind -- "Hrumph. This will all be worth it when Goldwater is elected and cuts capital gains taxes."

[I’m not Stu]

The thread title is dishonest. It isn’t about wrongfully refusing to admit Asian students.

[jaichind]

  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

Jaichind at job interview in 1963 .

 Interviewer -- "So solly, Chinaman! We don't hire your type here!"

Jaichind -- "Hrumph. This will all be worth it when Goldwater is elected and cuts capital gains taxes."

The logical conclusion of such logic is that everyone should have a mind reader attached to their brain so when they walk past a store A and enter store B to buy groceries the mind reader should ascertain if such a decision was based on the race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age etc etc of the store owner of A and report such findings to the government

[Badger]

  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

Jaichind at job interview in 1963 .

 Interviewer -- "So solly, Chinaman! We don't hire your type here!"

Jaichind -- "Hrumph. This will all be worth it when Goldwater is elected and cuts capital gains taxes."

The logical conclusion of such logic is that everyone should have a mind reader attached to their brain so when they walk past a store A and enter store B to buy groceries the mind reader should ascertain if such a decision was based on the race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age etc etc of the store owner of A and report such findings to the government

What are frankly juvenile assessment of racial discrimination. Until the 1964 CRA pass, there were stores throughout the South and the country that said whites only.

[jaichind]

  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

Jaichind at job interview in 1963 .

 Interviewer -- "So solly, Chinaman! We don't hire your type here!"

Jaichind -- "Hrumph. This will all be worth it when Goldwater is elected and cuts capital gains taxes."

The logical conclusion of such logic is that everyone should have a mind reader attached to their brain so when they walk past a store A and enter store B to buy groceries the mind reader should ascertain if such a decision was based on the race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age etc etc of the store owner of A and report such findings to the government

What are frankly juvenile assessment of racial discrimination. Until the 1964 CRA pass, there were stores throughout the South and the country that said whites only.

And where the government mandates them to be White only I would oppose such government action but where they make that choice as part of a business strategy I feel they should be free to do so.  A private institution should have the freedom of association and make its own decisions on who or what they want to make economic transitions with.  The only part of 1964 Civil Rights Act which I would back is that it would make illegal state and local government action to mandate racial segregation for private institutions.   

[Badger]

  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

Jaichind at job interview in 1963 .

 Interviewer -- "So solly, Chinaman! We don't hire your type here!"

Jaichind -- "Hrumph. This will all be worth it when Goldwater is elected and cuts capital gains taxes."

The logical conclusion of such logic is that everyone should have a mind reader attached to their brain so when they walk past a store A and enter store B to buy groceries the mind reader should ascertain if such a decision was based on the race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age etc etc of the store owner of A and report such findings to the government

What are frankly juvenile assessment of racial discrimination. Until the 1964 CRA pass, there were stores throughout the South and the country that said whites only.

And where the government mandates them to be White only I would oppose such government action but where they make that choice as part of a business strategy I feel they should be free to do so.  A private institution should have the freedom of association and make its own decisions on who or what they want to make economic transitions with.  The only part of 1964 Civil Rights Act which I would back is that it would make illegal state and local government action to mandate racial segregation for private institutions.   

" segregation as a business strategy". Neat.

Let me remind you, gentle readers, that this vileness comes from the same poster who, quite seriously, acknowledged he would invest in a child prostitution brothel so long as it was sufficiently profitable for him.

[Nightcore Nationalist]

Our society has evolved past the need for Affirmative Action.  It was once an idea with noble intentions, but it runs contrary to the idea of equality before the law and sets different standards based on race.  It should all just be scrapped.  It's not 1975, anymore.

[lfromnj]

The thread title is dishonest. It isn’t about wrongfully refusing to admit Asian students.

How is my thread title dishonest when its basically just the article title?

[TDAS04]

I do have problems with affirmative action.  Even if you support it, I would think there’s something very questionable about a rich white guy from Spain receiving preferential treatment over a Hmong refugee.

I favor greater assistance to college applicants who are poor and/or disabled individuals, regardless of ethnicity.  Since certain ethnic groups experience poverty at greater rates than others, that would be a good way to indirectly increase diversity.

[KaiserDave]

  The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

Jaichind at job interview in 1963 .

 Interviewer -- "So solly, Chinaman! We don't hire your type here!"

Jaichind -- "Hrumph. This will all be worth it when Goldwater is elected and cuts capital gains taxes."

The logical conclusion of such logic is that everyone should have a mind reader attached to their brain so when they walk past a store A and enter store B to buy groceries the mind reader should ascertain if such a decision was based on the race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age etc etc of the store owner of A and report such findings to the government

What are frankly juvenile assessment of racial discrimination. Until the 1964 CRA pass, there were stores throughout the South and the country that said whites only.

And where the government mandates them to be White only I would oppose such government action but where they make that choice as part of a business strategy I feel they should be free to do so.  A private institution should have the freedom of association and make its own decisions on who or what they want to make economic transitions with.  The only part of 1964 Civil Rights Act which I would back is that it would make illegal state and local government action to mandate racial segregation for private institutions.   

" segregation as a business strategy". Neat.

Let me remind you, gentle readers, that this vileness comes from the same poster who, quite seriously, acknowledged he would invest in a child prostitution brothel so long as it was sufficiently profitable for him.

Link I beg you

[politicallefty]

I don’t support affirmative action. It’s one of the few major points of disagreement I have with my party. I think it’s the lazy way out of trying to solve a very complex problem and something that only creates more problems in the process.

[Pericles]

Hasn't affirmative action already been gutted to be a 'factor of a factor', and only in the context of promoting overall diversity among the student body (which is a worthy goal, Ivy League alumni shouldn't be disproportionately white)? So basically what this would be is where the applications are virtually equal, and race provides the very slight tilt to one applicant over another.

[John Dule]

" segregation as a business strategy". Neat.

Let me remind you, gentle readers, that this vileness comes from the same poster who, quite seriously, acknowledged he would invest in a child prostitution brothel so long as it was sufficiently profitable for him.

So you'd rather the state force people to perform labor they don't want to for people they don't want to serve? IDK bruh that sounds like slavery to me

[Badger]

 The 1964 Civil Rights Act was and is still a huge mistake and there is no reason to continue that mistake.

Jaichind at job interview in 1963 .

 Interviewer -- "So solly, Chinaman! We don't hire your type here!"

Jaichind -- "Hrumph. This will all be worth it when Goldwater is elected and cuts capital gains taxes."

The logical conclusion of such logic is that everyone should have a mind reader attached to their brain so when they walk past a store A and enter store B to buy groceries the mind reader should ascertain if such a decision was based on the race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age etc etc of the store owner of A and report such findings to the government

What are frankly juvenile assessment of racial discrimination. Until the 1964 CRA pass, there were stores throughout the South and the country that said whites only.

And where the government mandates them to be White only I would oppose such government action but where they make that choice as part of a business strategy I feel they should be free to do so.  A private institution should have the freedom of association and make its own decisions on who or what they want to make economic transitions with.  The only part of 1964 Civil Rights Act which I would back is that it would make illegal state and local government action to mandate racial segregation for private institutions.    

" segregation as a business strategy". Neat.

Let me remind you, gentle readers, that this vileness comes from the same poster who, quite seriously, acknowledged he would invest in a child prostitution brothel so long as it was sufficiently profitable for him.

Link I beg you

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=246536.msg5291145#msg5291145

[Former President tack50]

The fact that it is so difficult for Asian Americans to get into top colleges is a bit iffy, but it is not African-Americans who are being admitted at their expense. It is white kids whose parents are donors or who are legacy. If such practices occurred at the top British universities there would be widespread outrage. This is the negative side of having a large number of private universities; in the UK virtually all are public.

I mean, from what I understand no countries in Europe really have anything like affirmative action right? (And thankfully)