Supreme Court ends affirmation action

The differences are evident everywhere you test them. Until someone can show a study where people of African origin show no average differences to people of other races, then it's presumed to be innate/genetic/biological because the racial differences in IQ always stack up the same way, with Asians at the top and blacks at the bottom. EVERYWHERE in the world.

Now, this isn't to say I think cultural changes wouldn't improve things for black communities. I think the opposite of what dumb@ss liberals prescribes needs to happen - get the all the criminals out of the communities, so the generational cycles of drug abuse, crime, broken families, being unemployed and living off the government can stop. Or, you can do what Democrats have been doing in cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Detroit, Atlanta for decades and keep seeing the same results.

I'm not necessarily defending legacy admissions, I don't know enough about how/why they work, but the comparison between the two is typical liberal whataboutism, grasping at straws. They're not the same. As a country, we've determined that discriminating based on race is a violation of human rights, which is why the SC prohibited AA and not legacy admissions. It's disingenuous for liberals to even bring legacy admissions up, and I think it's time for people to stop giving libs the time of day when they do, because they're not making their arguments in good faith.

.

Understood. I was going to lump them into Australasia at first but didn't edit all the post.

You will never hear of white conservatives railing against legacy preferences because it favors their kind and banning it will reveal the cognitive superiority of the Asians who will overwhelmingly dominate all the placements.Just as a cursory glance at American sporting landscape reveals the genetic masculine physical superiority of blacks.

Asians already outnumber whites in elite institutions. Legacy will favor Asians more than whites in the very near future. Legacy admissions are colorblind.

Most of the legacy admits at top schools are coastal liberals' kids. Just like the whole admission scandal cheaters. Most of them were pretend do gooders from CA and East Coast.

Isn’t it amazing how Democrats step in their own s-it, constantly???

Data shows that 29% of Vietnamese, 18% of Laotian and 16% of Cambodian American adults have bachelor’s degrees or higher, compared to 54% of Asian Americans overall.

yahoo.com

Asian American low-income, community college students feel unheard in affirmative action debate

While the debate over affirmative action often centers Asian Americans with the means to go to a highly selective private university, a higher share of the group goes to community college.

Open link

I know that math is difficult for your kind, but do try to keep up.

Legacy admissions DO NOT favor whomever has the greatest number of alumni but rather, whomever has the greatest number of alumni RELATIVE TO the number who would be admitted sans legacy admissions. As a result your statement, "Legacy will favor Asians more than whites in the very near future" is profoundly WRONG and a clear indication of your ignorance.

Again, do try to keep up.

Lol I highly doubt Uppity Black knew that whites were in the minority compared to non-whites when making his argument. Good on you for moving the goal posts for him in your logical sleight-of-hand.

So then legacy admissions didn't favor whites until recently, since (according to you) legacy admissions favor those who are in the racial minority. I don't adhere to that logic, but that's what you're saying.

The bottom line on this discussion is that any preference not based on merit, be it due to race or legacy, is completely wrong.

That should be obvious to everyone.

And the democratic leaders are on the wrong side of this issue. The population is against race based preferences. Its a loser issue for them. Its not like abortion where the population wanted the government to stay out of personal medical decisions.

If affirmative action is discrimination, legacy admissions must also be discrimination. Remember that the litigants in the SC case did not show that they were denied entry because their specific spot was given to a minority. They simply presumed that they would have been admitted but for a spot being given to a minority. Discrimination law has a fairly low bar for plaintiffs (burden shifting analysis, disparate impact, etc.). But Roberts' "zero sum game" argument basically means that discrimination is presumed whenever there are a select number of spots and race is a factor in one person getting a spot.

So, with legacy admissions, you have a lot of prestigious schools that pretty much had no minorities up to the 1960s. And many students gaining admission during the civil rights era came from schools that were segregated with minorities having to attend vastly inferior schools that whites attended. De jure discrimination and segregation in schools would then give way to de facto segregation with white flight to suburban schools in the 1970s and 80s. So, many legacy admissions have deep roots in students who went to high school in a time when minorities had no real shot at getting into an elite school, much less any college. Thus, legacy admissions just freeze in time discrimination of the past.

Well, Lydia Edwards is a complete moron since she can't be bothered to google top colleges' demographics: "Legacy preferences is what blocks a lot of people from getting into colleges and universities. Some Ivy League institutions having 35% of their students being legacy preferences, and they don't have 35% people of color, so it wasn't affirmative action."

Not counting the obvious grammar mistake and the unintelligible wording, it's a lie that they're not "35% people of color" - except if leftists are counting Asians as white, as they often do. It's also a lie that 35% of students are legacy but that's another story.

In recent times, it's far easier for quota-filling students to get in than the actually deserving, non-quota students. Secondly, legacy is a race-blind category

Legacy isn’t merit.

Discrimination isn't illegal, only discrimination based on race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, age and whatever other protected categories apply. Also I've discussed in another thread how whites are no longer the majority compared to non-whites in elite institutions, and how whites will no longer overwhelmingly make up legacy admissions. This should be great news to libs!

Edit: I'm not sure why someone would downvote this. At elite institutions, racial minorities make up the majority compared to whites. Isn't this what liberals wanted all along? Diversity, equity and inclusion has been achieved. I don't understand the seething outrage.