what race to mark on LS apps?

[redemption]

Ok let's use my case as a case study. I'm thoroughly interested in your opinions. 

I am approximately 1/6-1/10 pure blooded native american. I don't have any tribal card. As I've allready discussed I recently found that I was related to both the chieftans of the Chickasaws and Cherokees.  The majority of my ancestors stayed behind in Alabama during the trail of tears.  Recently I have been able to document 1/12 of my lineage.  The chickasaw tribe used to return to my grandfather's land every year for a tribal meeting. My grandfather practiced the traditions.  My uncles practice the traditions.  My great grandmother was a shaman. Two of my great great great grandfather's were chieftans.  Obviously those before them who are documented were chieftans.  My line is well documented by both tribes. But, I had limited knowledge of this lineage until one year ago. 

Since then I have contacted both the Chickasaw tribe and LSAC.  Both confirmed that I qualify as a native american.  I am eligible for a tribal card with the Chickasaw tribe, but I have not applied. I appear fair skinned as most chickasaw do.  I have marked Native American on my applications.

What do you think about my case?

Do you feel native american? Do you feel that you have suffered disadvantage because of it? Do you feel that you would bring a perspective to your future law school class that is inflected with a "native-american" vantage point. If the answer to all 3 questions is no, then I myself would mark nothing at all on the form. If the answer to any one of these is yes, I would check the "native american" box.

[jnc18]

Ok let's use my case as a case study. I'm thoroughly interested in your opinions. 

I am approximately 1/6-1/10 pure blooded native american. I don't have any tribal card. As I've allready discussed I recently found that I was related to both the chieftans of the Chickasaws and Cherokees.  The majority of my ancestors stayed behind in Alabama during the trail of tears.  Recently I have been able to document 1/12 of my lineage.  The chickasaw tribe used to return to my grandfather's land every year for a tribal meeting. My grandfather practiced the traditions.  My uncles practice the traditions.  My great grandmother was a shaman. Two of my great great great grandfather's were chieftans.  Obviously those before them who are documented were chieftans.  My line is well documented by both tribes. But, I had limited knowledge of this lineage until one year ago. 

Since then I have contacted both the Chickasaw tribe and LSAC.  Both confirmed that I qualify as a native american.  I am eligible for a tribal card with the Chickasaw tribe, but I have not applied. I appear fair skinned as most chickasaw do.  I have marked Native American on my applications.

What do you think about my case?

Being that I don't know you, try not to take this too personally.  But based on your description of yourself, I'd say it would be completely heinous for you to mark "Native American" on your application only.  However, I'd say it is fully within your right to mark it in addition to "Caucasian".  That is from a practical usage perspective.  (To be honest, I have to believe that when law schools see that, they pretty much ignore it anyway.)

Other than that, it is good that you embrace your heritage and I hope that you are able to explore the culture and history further.  At the same time I hope you don't try to use this knowledge of your genetic history as validation that you understand what it's like to be an underrepresented or oppressed minority. 

[AH]

I would agree that marking both would be acceptable (mostly because that is what I did and my situation is *somehwat* similar to yours, about as similar as any of these issues of heritage can be I guess).

Using "Do you feel NA" as an indicator is completely ineffective.  I can feel Native Hawaiian all I want, but that didn't get me into the private school (and it didn't win the supreme court case for those individuals who were LOCAL, but not NATIVE HAWAIIAN, who tried to get in).

[jag227]

Ok let's use my case as a case study. I'm thoroughly interested in your opinions. 

I am approximately 1/6-1/10 pure blooded native american. I don't have any tribal card. As I've allready discussed I recently found that I was related to both the chieftans of the Chickasaws and Cherokees.  The majority of my ancestors stayed behind in Alabama during the trail of tears.  Recently I have been able to document 1/12 of my lineage.  The chickasaw tribe used to return to my grandfather's land every year for a tribal meeting. My grandfather practiced the traditions.  My uncles practice the traditions.  My great grandmother was a shaman. Two of my great great great grandfather's were chieftans.  Obviously those before them who are documented were chieftans.  My line is well documented by both tribes. But, I had limited knowledge of this lineage until one year ago. 

Since then I have contacted both the Chickasaw tribe and LSAC.  Both confirmed that I qualify as a native american.  I am eligible for a tribal card with the Chickasaw tribe, but I have not applied. I appear fair skinned as most chickasaw do.  I have marked Native American on my applications.

What do you think about my case?

Do you feel native american? Do you feel that you have suffered disadvantage because of it? Do you feel that you would bring a perspective to your future law school class that is inflected with a "native-american" vantage point. If the answer to all 3 questions is no, then I myself would mark nothing at all on the form. If the answer to any one of these is yes, I would check the "native american" box.

Well I just wrote a long response to your comment and then it was erased- I guess my account logged out when I took too long writing it-

I basically gave my case to see what your response would be. I don't have the time to rewrite my response, but the bottom line is this- Your questions have no relavance to the question at hand. Nevermind that I can answer yes to them.  The question here is what is the question. LSAC and law school admissions are asking legaly what ethnicity you are.  It has nothing to do with the way I feel. The question is what can I document.

If a family of english descent moved to the Chickasaw Nation and lived there for the entirety of their lives would they be Native American. Maybe if circumstances were right and they could document how they were Native American. In a case, that you perhaps perceive mine to be, where an individual can document their ancestory, but has no connection with the culture, the individual still has the right to mark Native American because he has the proper documentation.

[jag227]

...continued

-I wish my original response wasn't erased-

In my original response I talked about interrogatories in my state.  In my state's code interrogatories are limited to either 20 or 30 questions.  You strike me as the type of person who would try and embed questions abcd etc. into your questions. I count embeded questions as questions.  If I recieve an interrogatory with more than the limit then I will answer to the limit and then give vague answers to the rest of the questions.  I will answer the extra questions out of courtesy.  If they try to make a point out of the fact that I responded vaguely to their questions I will proceed to make a point that they exceeded their limit of questions. Legally I am not required to answer past the limit.

This case is very similar in that you are placing personal limitations on the question at hand that simply are not there. Legally I can document the fact that I am Native American.  The fact that I happen to answer yes to any of your questions has no validity to the question of whether or not my ethnicity is NA.  If I answered no to all three of your questions, I could/would still mark NA on my application. Legally I have satisfied all requirements.  It is legal and I have received the consent of the Chickasaw Nation and LSAC.

You see law is not a question of what is right or wrong. Law is a question of what is legal.  If you are going to succeed in the legal community you need to distinguish between those two issues.  If you want to succeed in the poilitical sphere, then you're right where you need to be.

I'll let this rest for now with one more question.  Where on applications, or on what application, does it state that you may mark more than one response for ethnicity?

[jnc18]

Where on applications, or on what application, does it state that you may mark more than one response for ethnicity?

For some of the schools I've come across:

Berkeley: you may check more than one box
Chicago: Please check the most appropriate box or boxes.
Columbia: Please check the most appropriate response.
Duke: Check the primary race or ethnic group that best applies to you:
Harvard: How would you describe yourself?
Michigan: Please mark the one race or ethnicity that you think best applies to you.
Penn: Please check the most appropriate box or boxes.
Stanford: If you wish to self-identify further, please do so __________

Should I take that you asked this question as an indication that you simply marked "Native American" on your application?  I sincerely hope not as that would be near fraudulent.  If so, not only is that about the lamest thing I've ever heard, it's an affront to Native Americans and exploitation of everything they've had to overcome.  And that's real.

By the way, 1/8th Native American isn't an URM.  It's your average American.

[Mr Shears]

Cooley: "Please check your ethnic category (optional):" and there is a section for "Other ______________"

[magnumalv]

By the way, 1/8th Native American isn't an URM.  It's your average American.

  

Luckily, I have no such dilemmas. My family's names are Chow and Mao, for Christ's sake. I don't know how much more Chinese I could be.

[Mr Shears]

Maybe if your mother's last name was Mein and she combined the two.

[magnumalv]

Maybe if your mother's last name was Mein and she combined the two.

  How did you know my mother's name?