Harvard used "personality score" to sort out applicants. Now, they got rid of "personality score", SAT/ACT/LSAT/MCAT, etc., scores. They can tell their feeder schools even four years earlier, how to prepare admission packets for prospective students. Schools like Harvard, Princeton, Yale and Stanford can pick whatever students they want.

At the risk of getting sued and having it go back up to the same court that gave us this decision

I'd sort of imagine that if anyone has the legal minds to bend the system towards their will, it's Harvard.

Adcoms (admission committees) have learned their hard lessons. Williams R. Fitzsimmons and Rakesh Khurana of Harvard might have told everyone to not put everything in writing, just as CEOs tell underlings to not put in writing in order to not be found in the discovery process. And these professors and deans we ordinary mortals should emulate for ethical exemplars. Maybe, they should follow what they preach to students.

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina that relied in part on racial considerations, saying they violate the Constitution.

> Sotomayor, the court’s first Latina, has been the boldest defender of what she prefers to call “race-sensitive” admission policies and has referred to herself as the “perfect affirmative action child.”

That will probably not do a lot to convince those happy with this outcome.

Im really not so sure. I've seen plenty of support for "affirmative action", just not based on race. Most people are more than ok with giving those in need an edge, given their situation, but many are against promoting a rich black person over a poor white one.

And sure, race can serve as a proxy, the black population in the United States is impoverished compared to the mean, but in the same way that it's not acceptable to take race as proxy when it comes to crime, it's not acceptable to do it when it comes to livelihood, in my opinion.

Sotomayor revealed in oral argument for this very case that she does not understand the difference between "de facto" and "de jure". There's plenty of other things to dislike her for beyond one liners in interviews.

Yeah. That was really weird. I don't know what to make of it, since it's hard to believe that she actually doesn't know the difference between the terms.

I just finished reading her dissent in this case, and I actually think she understands the legal difference, but because of her policy preferences (in this case, racism is actually okay but only for college admissions) she just forgot for a while.

A win for meritocracy - https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/new-chart-illustrates-graphic...

Then the headline should be: "Legacies are banned from top tier private schools".

Around 25% of admissions in Ivy League schools are legacies. Unsurprisingly, this does not seem to outrage certain parts of society that much.

That's bad too.

Meritocracy may not be what you think it is, or achieve the results you assume. See recent books by Markovits and Sandel:

* https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/10/24/20919030/...

* https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/10/21/20897021/meritocra...

* https://press.princeton.edu/ideas/a-belief-in-meritocracy-is...

* https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/01/the-myth-of-m...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy#Criticism

The word's modern popularity originated in a pejorative meaning which was then lost:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy

Once people 'are in', they get more resources, and that allows for (e.g.) their children to have more opportunities, and so they then in turn win. If you have a person who does not 'get in' and 'win', then they have fewer resources / opportunities to show or develop what skills they may have: a doom-loop can become possible.

As an example of what resources can get you:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_Blues_scandal

* https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/rick-singer-mastermin...

Okay, but race based admissions for college is bad and I'm glad its revoked.

Sad day.

Could you explain why?

Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36520658.