Supreme Court Set to Hear Arguments in UT-Austin Case
WASHINGTON — College admissions processes could soon undergo fundamental changes, depending on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving the University of Texas at Austin. Justices on Wednesday will hear oral arguments for and against the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions processes.
Abigail Fisher, a white student who graduated outside the top 10 percent of her high school class, was denied admission to UT-Austin in 2008. Claiming that students with lower test scores and less extracurricular involvement were admitted to UT-Austin over her because of their race, Fisher sued the university.
Now the justices will consider Fisher ...
Comments (2)
Jim Golub
"Racial Diversity" is a farce... Granted, denying entry because of race, ANY race, is morally and ethically wrong. But, that's not what "racial diversity" is about. If TRUE "racial Diversity was the goal, you would attempt to get the same racial distribution in whatever institution as there is in the general population as determined by the most recent census. That means, the school's registration should consist roughly of 16% Hispanic, 12% Negro*, and 5% Asian, the balance being White/all others. THAT would be true racial diversity- and ohhh wouldn't there be ranting, wailing, and gnashing of teeth if that were enforced!.............. The truth of the matter is that ANY enforced racial discriminating for admission (to anything) is racist and wrong and really does not benefit anybody.......... The sole purpose of a higher learning institution is to educate. To participate in the established curricula of any such institution, a certain amount of knowledge must already have been attained as determined by scholastic record and testing. Any, ANY, who fail these criteria should not be admitted and any other criteria should be irrelevant. That does not mean that anybody CANNOT attend, it only means that they have to wait, apply themselves, and study, to bring themselves to the level that everybody else has to have to enter..... Yes. That also means that some people simply will not be able to make it. Personally, I doubt I could ever manage to pass. I am not scholastically inclined. But that's just me and that doesn't mean I'm stupid or can't learn. Being a machinist is not easy or for the slow witted. But those kind of accomplishments have no place or value in academia.......... Now THERE lies true diversity. A place for everybody to aspire to- a place where they can excel, wherever and at whatever that may be, and no artificial barriers, race, ethnicity, religion, whatever, to the achievement of that end. And as long as there are government barriers, SOMEbody is going to be discriminated against. That is what must be guarded against. It is no problem to bring suit for discrimination these days. Let that be the enforcement. IF someone is discriminated against, let them sue. If it happens too often against one institution, THEN let the government step in, Cutting of funds would be a powerful motivator to walk the line. But, as long as there is any barrier in place that says any may or may not enter for any reason of race &tc, we are wrong and ultimately, everybody will suffer for it.
Hannah Katz
When we have lower standards for non-Asian minority students to gain admission, you will find fewer and fewer students listing their race as white. You will get more and more students doing what Elizabeth Warren did, claiming they are part Native American, part Latino, etc. Is a student who is half white and half Latino able to get the easy admission as Latino? How about if one quarter Latino? One eighth?
Also, the racial spoils system discriminates against Asian American students, who outperform most other groups, including whites. How about we just accept the top candidates, period?