http://lucy-chronicles.livejournal.com/ (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
lucy-chronicles.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
therightfangirl2010-01-06 10:34 am
lucy-chronicles.livejournal.com) wrote in therightfangirl2010-01-06 10:34 am
Entry tags:
Review for the younger and uninformed; DIVERSITY QUOTAS
Pursuant to the transgender appointee discussion. The point missed by those uneducated (comparatively GOT by the FB community) is the problem w/ a seeming mandatory/quota system. To those who say prove who was passed over, give it a few days and a few bloggers to ferret out interviews on the ground. I sincerely doubt there WEREN'T others who were JUST as qualified if not moreso than the appointed person.
And on another note, at *least* a 'white male' can still be appointed by this administration in these times, beyond the token 'insurance' of Joe Biden!
------------------
Hopwood v. Texas (1996)
In 1992, plaintiff Cheryl Hopwood, a White American woman, was denied admission to the School of Law despite being better qualified than many admitted minority candidates. Texas Monthly editor Paul Burka later described Hopwood as "the perfect plaintiff to question the fairness of reverse discrimination" because of her academic credentials and personal hardships which she had endured (including a young daughter suffering from a muscular disease).[3]
The case of Hopwood v. Texas (1996) was the first successful legal challenge to affirmative action in student admissions since Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) ruled quotas were unconstitutional. The 5th Circuit ruled that the school "may not use race as a factor in deciding which applicants to admit in order to achieve a diverse student body, to combat the perceived effects of a hostile environment at the law school, to alleviate the law school's poor reputation in the minority community, or to eliminate any present effects of past discrimination by actors other than the law school."[
Source - general Wikipedia
UT has thereafter revised the entire admittance system to include essays, personal achievements and other criteria beyond merely grades to constitute admittance. (personal source and the previous Alum website as I am a Texas Ex.)
And on another note, at *least* a 'white male' can still be appointed by this administration in these times, beyond the token 'insurance' of Joe Biden!
------------------
Hopwood v. Texas (1996)
In 1992, plaintiff Cheryl Hopwood, a White American woman, was denied admission to the School of Law despite being better qualified than many admitted minority candidates. Texas Monthly editor Paul Burka later described Hopwood as "the perfect plaintiff to question the fairness of reverse discrimination" because of her academic credentials and personal hardships which she had endured (including a young daughter suffering from a muscular disease).[3]
The case of Hopwood v. Texas (1996) was the first successful legal challenge to affirmative action in student admissions since Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) ruled quotas were unconstitutional. The 5th Circuit ruled that the school "may not use race as a factor in deciding which applicants to admit in order to achieve a diverse student body, to combat the perceived effects of a hostile environment at the law school, to alleviate the law school's poor reputation in the minority community, or to eliminate any present effects of past discrimination by actors other than the law school."[
Source - general Wikipedia
UT has thereafter revised the entire admittance system to include essays, personal achievements and other criteria beyond merely grades to constitute admittance. (personal source and the previous Alum website as I am a Texas Ex.)