The same nonprofit that is suing Harvard University for racial discrimination — against Asians and Whites — is now suing the University of North Carolina:
In their filing, the plaintiffs said their analysis of UNC’s admissions data showed race is a “determinative” factor for many underrepresented minorities, particularly African-American and Hispanic applicants from outside the state.
In a 2003 ruling, the Supreme Court said universities can use race as a “plus” factor in admissions, but must evaluate each applicant individually and not consider race as the defining feature of the application.
The plaintiffs also say the school has violated Supreme Court precedent by failing to seriously attempt race-neutral alternatives to achieving diversity.
Lawyers for UNC said in Friday’s filing that race is not a dominant factor in admissions. UNC said it uses a holistic approach to admissions, with application readers scoring applicants in five categories: academic program, academic performance, extracurricular activities, essays and personal qualities, like “curiosity, integrity, and history of overcoming obstacles.”
The school said race has no numerical weight at any point in the review.
[...]
For applicants to UNC-Chapel Hill in 2012, the average SAT score for admitted Asian or Asian-American students was 1431, compared with 1360 for white applicants and 1229 for African Americans, according to the plaintiffs. They said that differential, as well as a similar gap in grade-point averages, shows the school gives an unfair tip to applicants of certain races or ethnicities, despite weaker academic credentials.
In Friday’s filing, the plaintiffs also said UNC admissions readers frequently highlight the applicant’s race, citing one reader’s comment that even with an ACT score of 26, they should “give these brown babies a shot at these merit $$.” Another reader wrote, “Stellar academics for a Native Amer/African Amer kid,” the plaintiffs said.
Steve Farmer, the university’s vice provost for enrollment and undergraduate admissions, said in response: “Language in this exchange does not reflect Carolina’s values or our admissions process.”
Affirmative action needs to go the way of the Dred Scott decision. It was never a good idea, and what they should have done was to implement remedial training and education opportunities for those who were unable to enter these institutions and jobs on their own merits.
The idea that you can have a black guy who can’t pass the testing to become a fire department crew chief get a leg up on guys who spend all their spare time studying, while not bothering to improve themselves at all? That’s a crock, and always has been. The way they implemented AA throughout most of the institutions in the US was purest BS. I get that there are problems for various minorities, but the way you overcome them is not by making special allowances and lowering standards for them, you do it by helping them meet the standard. If they don’t want to improve themselves to meet that standard, too bad.
I could give you case after case that I personally observed in the US Army where affirmative action policies were detrimental to good order and discipline, as well as where they eroded what could be termed “faith and trust in the institution” by the people who got screwed over in order to advance unqualified minorities. AA as implemented is a disaster, and needs to die.