Every competitive school has a diversity goal (though perhaps not outright quota) at some level for many dimensions of diversity. Many/most schools have academic floors but are then looking to blend in other factors other than pure academic achievement.

The UC chancellors would certainly like to blend diversity goals into their admissions process, but they're prohibited from doing so by state law, and most commentators I've seen believe the prohibition is reasonably effective.

The UCs are prohibited from doing this by Prop 209. Prop 16 this year is an attempt to undo that https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_16,_Repeal_Pr...

And yet, they still try to introduce racial diversity by using policies in disguise.

The entire sub-part of UC admissions having to do with top 9% of students (by school) being guaranteed admission is an effort to achieve racial diversity without calling it that and violating the law.

See page 9 and 21 of the UC's admissions materials. https://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/counselors/file...

It's funny you mention that policy, because note it can only have a substantial effect on admissions by race if a lot of high schools are racially segregated, as is the case.

See any of a number of sources, such as this one which a quick search turned up: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/learning/lesson-plans/sti...

> diversity goal

Well, if Cal has one - it's not one that it can target through changing admission practices.

If you don't think UC has a diversity quota, you are deceiving yourself.

The entire sub-part of UC admissions having to do with top 9% of students (by school) being guaranteed admission is an effort to achieve racial diversity without calling it that and violating the law.

See page 9 and 21 of the UC's admissions materials. https://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/counselors/file...

It's racism against white people to automatically admit everyone to UC (not Cal) who is in the top 9% of their class?

No, it's racism against everyone who is displaced from otherwise being admitted, so that the UC can under-the-table enact a policy designed to increase the number of black and Hispanic admits without saying it's affirmative action.

Well and classism against more affluent students displaced when some poor kid of any color at some rural school gets an advantage. Or favoring kids that are first to attend college is displacing kids with better-educated families.

I don't have a moral problem with this. It's not a good strategy in life to voluntary switch to a poorer performing school to give yourself a leg up in UC admissions while taking the cost of having less academically competitive high school classmates. It is a reasonable metric to view students through the lens of "how much have they accomplished given the opportunities afforded to them" -- the issue with something like Prop 16 is that it engages in statistical racial discrimination (mostly against racial minorities for that matter) to make that consideration.