I really don't see how this study, if you want to call it that, is helpful. Even if some correlation does exist, the study can't make any reasonable claim as to what would happen if the rules were changed, there are too many factors, anything said is speculation. The bottom line is if a student goes to a top school, does poorly and fails the bar, he or she only hurts himself or herself. Also, there are a number of possible reasons for any student doing poorly at a school, inability is only one of them.
To address each of your three points:
1) It is helpful in the sense that it provides some empirical evidence concerning the performance of African American individuals who are unnaturally elevated to higher ranked law schools through the process of AA. Meaning- How do they perform once they are there? Would you prefer we allow AA and just not check its academic effects?
2) It is dismissive of you to say that if an African American goes to a law school beyond his ability and fails, then it is his own problem. AA is undertaken by American society, in large part, to advance a generation of successful African Americans and create a diverse classroom. If these individuals are failing or performing in mediocrity at alarming rates, it affects the entire social program and diminishes the cause.
3) When you say there are a number of possible reasons for a law student performing poorly beyond just a measure of ability, what do you really mean? Of course there are students that face personal or health issues, but what issues are present to blacks and not whites that would account for such gargantuan gaps in performance and bar passage rates?
1. You say it is emperical evidence, well, in that case you would have to compare the current situation to the situation before AA, wouldn't you? Fabricating what could happen is not empirical.
2. Your compassion is overwhelming. In total, I disagree. If you go beyond your means and fail, you only have yourself to blaim. It's not like someone at a school too hard for them could not get into an easier school. I do agree that failures should be addressed, but removing AA and returning to the all-white law schools of the past doesn't seem like the best alternative.
3. I don't know, niether do you. I'm just pointing out a possibility, you seem to except those quite frequently.
This is your response? All of your refutations are terrible.
1) How would comparing the situation before AA help this discussion? What would such information reveal? The FACTS of the study (irrespective of the author's conclusion) reveal that black law students perform in mediocrity disproportionably to their white counterparts. Do you dispute this?
2) You are correct that without AA, elite law schools would be nearly entirely white and Asian. But this is your entire rational for AA? What is the point of sending masses of unqualified blacks to law schools beyond their means so they can most likely perform poorly. You are content to have blacks fail at alarming rates so they can be represented and make you feel moral? Do you not see the irony there?
3) "I don't know and neither do you". Great answer; The little catch is that YOU were the one who brought up the possibility of "other reasons" beyond lack of ability as an explanation for the alarming mediocrity of black law students. Did you actually mean anything when you said that or do you just enjoy throwing out red herrings?
ps: This guy will make you feel great: http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=whoknew
My response is terrible because you say so? Wow, that is the kind of arguing I should take up I guess. Anyway, good job answering things I didn't say and making more stuff up. To spell it out:
1. You said it was emperical evidence, look up this word. If you are using emperical evidence, you have to compare AA now verses the way things were before AA, otherwise it is not emperical, buddy. But, no, I don't dispute that singular claim, just your bold conclusions based on this fact.
2. I don't know what you mean by "fail" or "alarming rate." Anyway, I don't think getting rid of AA help blacks, if that is your argument. There is no chance of success if you don't get a chance. Also, I like how you question my morals, who's really throwing out the red herrings? Again, you have stated blacks being incapable of succeeding as a reason to not let them into top law schools. In reality, you have no perspective on this, how do you know any of this...
3. Yes, I threw out a POSSIBILITY. I said it this, not a fact. The difference between what I siad and what you said is I acknowledged not knowing the correct answer, you did not. You blindly follow statistics to the conclusions you most want to be true.
PS. Your post script means jack sh*t, anyone can make a LSN profile amung other reasons that it is a worthless point.