Black LSAT statistics

[Miss P]

Like I said, I agree that the sense of entitlement is wrongheaded, and it bugs me to no end.  I still think that a recognition of the uniqueness of African American experiences, as distinguished both from other minority experiences and majority experiences, is less offensive than a pure numbers-based complaint.  That doesn't mean that I think international black applicants are undeserving of whatever extra consideration they may get under affirmative action programs.  It means that I think it's unfortunate that adcomms likely use that extra consideration to justify their lack of extra consideration of black applicants (whether they be international or African American) with lower numbers.

[pikey]

I find the argument "they are taking our spots" as offensive coming from a black person as a white person, but maybe thats just me.

not just you

thirded

I disagree slightly.  I think they are equally wrongheaded, but not necessarily equally offensive.  A white applicant complaining that "undeserving" URM students are taking his (well, usually) spot fails to recognize the reality of educational and other disadvantage most URM students bring to the table.  An African American applicant making this complaint about international black applicants is specifically recognizing those disadvantages.  Further, Madness is right: Adcomms do seize on the opportunity to admit international black applicants with higher entry credentials at the expense of African American applicants with lower entry credentials; it's not the African American students who are pitting themselves against international black applicants, it's the adcomms.  Still, I find the complaint misdirected, crass, unsavvy, etc.  And most important, it should never be leveled at individual applicants, like Moni, who are responding to race/ethnicity and other questions truthfully.

But I'm mostly posting as a belated tag.  Seeing Moni get all up in someone's face is hot.

I disagree.  They are both neglecting the value that the individual brings to the slot.  Why does a rich or uppermiddle class African American feel entitlement towards a particular slot over an African or Carribbean who may have themselves gone to shanty schools/faced obstacles etc.  Both views implicitly bring the baggage of their own version of merit/entitlement that I find problematic.

Ita.  Just because someone if not American, even if they are from a country where they are not the (demographic) minority, does not mean that they are not disadvantaged or have not been discriminated against.  Even if they haven't, is discriminate or disadvantage the only marker of Blackness?  Is that the scale we should use to judge who is most deserving?  I would argue that it isn't.

Even if it we all agreed that it is the correct scale, in the end it doesn't matter what we think.  What matters is what admissions people think.  It's their perogative to choose whoever they want to make up their law school.  Part of the problem is that there are so many objectives for AA, some of which are conflicting.  If your goal is diversity than it might make sense to choose a Black person from Ghana over a Black American.  If your goal is to redress historical wrongs then you'd probably do the opposite.  The reality is that none of us really know exactly why we are selected to attend a school...

[Miss P]

I don't disagree with either of you.  My point was more subtle.  Or silly.  Or maybe I was just wrong.  Who knows?

[pikey]

I don't disagree with either of you.  My point was more subtle.  Or silly.  Or maybe I was just wrong.  Who knows?

I understand the point you're making.  I just don't know that it's fair to expect schools to make that distinction for Black people when they don't do it for anyone else...  Heck, Black people can't agree what's "Black enough" (or "American enough"), why should we expect law schools to?

[One Step Ahead]

I don't disagree with either of you.  My point was more subtle.  Or silly.  Or maybe I was just wrong.  Who knows?

You wrong! 

[Miss P]

I don't disagree with either of you.  My point was more subtle.  Or silly.  Or maybe I was just wrong.  Who knows?

I understand the point you're making.  I just don't know that it's fair to expect schools to make that distinction for Black people when they don't do it for anyone else...  Heck, Black people can't agree what's "Black enough" (or "American enough"), why should we expect law schools to?

Well, it's not that I don't think schools make that distinction.  I think schools prey upon that distinction precisely because the ABA and USNews do not make it.  But no, I don't think this is a good enough reason to change the ABA and USNews standards.  I would like law schools to admit more black people -- international, African American, I don't really care.  

All I was saying is that the "You're taking my spot!" complaint coming from an embittered African American applicant is somewhat different from the same complaint (leveled against all black applicants) coming from an embittered white applicant.  That was really it.

I don't disagree with either of you.  My point was more subtle.  Or silly.  Or maybe I was just wrong.  Who knows?

You wrong! 

It wouldn't be the first time. 

[Miss P]

I don't disagree with either of you.  My point was more subtle.  Or silly.  Or maybe I was just wrong.  Who knows?

right for the wrong reasons.

Wisen me up.

[leostrauss]

I was wondering, if they give advantages to races which have clearly been discriminated against in the nation's past/present, then why not for nationalities that have been discriminated against (think Chinese, Irish, Italians, Mexicans etc)? Or do they? just trying to understand this complicated crap. thanks

[leostrauss]

thanks!

just as a follow up: does anyone ever argue that such considerations/actions fail the separate but equal test? why/why not?

[leostrauss]

also, how about jews? aren't they currently discriminated against?