6th Street

Were they in the top 10(8)%? If they weren't, then they should shove it because they didn't cut it academically and didn't qualify automatically. I don't see how they have a case with regards to race if they weren't in the automatic qualifying bracket even if they were in the 11th percentile.

They filed it, arguments are soon. The ridiculously short summary is that they use race as a component for a decision, but that it is not a quota.

Finishing in the top 10% should earn an applicant points in an overall equation, but should not be an automatic qualifying factor. Not all HSs are equal academically and there are students that likely finish near 15% in their class that would finish in the top 10% of another HS.

Using race as any sort of factor in admissions is unacceptable and I say that as a person whose child would stand to benefit if they were able to use race as a factor. America has come a very long way in kicking down racial barriers. Yet we sit here in 2012 and our own government divides us into groups based on race as if it is a good thing. IMO, we have reached a point that we will never regress as a society based on racial relations, however, we will also never break down every and all racial barriers unless we quit dividing one another into groups based upon this factor moving forward.

In one of the seminal cases on using race as a factor, I believe Ginsberg said race used as a factor should not be permanent, but hoped it was phased out in 25 years. We're approaching that number.

I understand the composition, but the Court is still limited by stare decisis (obligations to respect and follow the precedents established in prior rulings).

That said, and I am doing this all by memory, most of the landmark decisions, Bakke, Grutter, Hopwood, etc., all had splintered decisions, and were usually controlled by a swing vote or two (no majority decision, but majority on an issue or two). Sure, if the case was heading up with no precedent, the makeup of the court would matter, but throwing in the precedents throw off that easy determination and one has to look at see what decisions in the other cases were majority and demand respect and should not be overruled vs. what was simply a plurality opinion and easily defeated. If I had more time I would look into but I have my own trials to prepare for.

Roberts will rule it a Tax.

In a serious vane, one of the most unfair things is that you can be in the 11% of some schools and have a better education than the top 3% of some other schools My grand daughter was admitted to a major PhD program because she is part Native American according to her. All I know is I get part of the bills.

The really sad thing is that after the $$$$ to get your children through college, and them working hard enough between pub craws to make great grades- they can not find a job.
I know several families in that situation. My kid has a job but she graduated in the 70s.

Yeah it sounds like something she'd say right. But it was actually Sandra Traitor O'Connor.