r*******n
发帖数: 310 | 1 Affirmative Action (AA), Beida101, you are not alone!
AA, can somebody, anybody tell me what’s the hell of it? Good or bad to
Asian Americans for the past, current or future? Why do they have such huge
different views among even Asian Americans?
高院宣判后，亚裔两派的反应：
反对AA派：
80-20 EF's filling of an amicus brief before the Supreme Court:
Asian American co-filers:
i) National Federation of Indian American Associations (NFIA)
ii) The Indian American Forum For Political Education (IAFPE)
iii) Global Organization of People of Indian Origin
http://8020politicalpower.blogspot.com/
Believe that (copy from this blog):
(1) The Supreme Court made it clear that race-conscious admissions should
NOT be used unless there is "no workable race-neutral alternatives (that)
would produce the educational benefits of diversity (emphasis added)". 80-20
advocates a race-neutral college admissions policy. We are also for
diversity. However, diversity should be achieved WITHOUT discriminating
against Asian American college applicants, e.g. by replacing "race" with "
class". We are delighted that the Supreme Court seems to agree with both key
points that 80-20 has advocated.
(2) The SC also asked the lower court to apply "strict scrutiny" in
determining whether "race-conscious" in college admissions is called for.
支持AA派：
There are about 18 Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) education and
youth-serving organizations, and 52 higher education faculty and officials
for AA:
Such as:
AALDEF of New York,
OCA of Washington D.C.,
AAJC of Washington D.C.
APALC of Los Angeles
Look us look at two of them after the Supreme Court’s decision:
http://aaldef.org/press-releases/press-release/aapi-advocates-a
Today, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), joined
by Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) leaders and students, applauds
the U.S. Supreme Court for reaffirming in a 7-1 decision the value of
diversity in higher education in Fisher v. UT-Austin. Earlier this year,
AALDEF filed an amicus brief urging the Court to uphold UT-Austin's
admissions policy on behalf of 18 AAPI education and youth-serving
organizations, and 52 higher education faculty and officials.
"We commend the Supreme Court for reaffirming the compelling government
interest in racial and other forms of diversity, which provide crucial
benefits for AAPIs," said Khin Mai Aung, Director of the Educational Equity
Program at AALDEF. "Though the Court has remanded the case for another
review by the Fifth Circuit, we remain confident that UT's plan is one that
achieves diversity in a constitutionally sound manner. More importantly,
despite attempts by some to use Asian Americans as a wedge group, the Court'
s ruling acknowledges what AALDEF has maintained throughout: that Asian
Americans, like all students, benefit from an application process that
considers all of each candidate's qualities, including factors such as the
language spoken at home."
http://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/news-media/news/asian-amer
WASHINGTON--Asian Americans Advancing Justice ("Advancing Justice") is
encouraged by today's Supreme Court decision in Fisher v. University of
Texas at Austin ("Fisher"), which correctly reaffirms that diversity in
higher education is a compelling interest and that universities can consider
race and ethnicity as factors in admissions. Abigail Fisher's legal team
failed to strike down the University of Texas at Austin's ("UT-Austin")
admissions policy, but Advancing Justice is concerned that the Supreme Court
sent the case back to the lower court, ordering it to take a closer look at
whether UT- Austin's consideration of race was necessary. Advancing Justice
stands by its commitment to race-conscious admissions programs and is
confident that UT-Austin's consideration of race in its admissions policy is
constitutional. | r*******n
发帖数: 310 | 2 You can find the 80-20 EF Amicus Brief (filed jointly with the Louis D.
Brandeis Center for Human Rights) before the Supreme Court
http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/pdf/amicus-brief.pdf
Chinese edition:
http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/pdf/amicus-brief-chin
The AALDEF amicus brief:
http://aaldef.org/AALDEF%20Amicus%20Brief%20Fisher%20v.%20UT-Au
You can find the names of these organizations and individuals (some Chinese
of course) at the end of the file. | G*******9
发帖数: 4371 | 3 我觉得Beida101仍然是少数派，在亚裔或者华裔里面。
huge
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: Affirmative Action (AA), Beida101, you are not alone!
: AA, can somebody, anybody tell me what’s the hell of it? Good or bad to
: Asian Americans for the past, current or future? Why do they have such huge
: different views among even Asian Americans?
: 高院宣判后，亚裔两派的反应：
: 反对AA派：
: 80-20 EF's filling of an amicus brief before the Supreme Court:
: Asian American co-filers:
: i) National Federation of Indian American Associations (NFIA)
: ii) The Indian American Forum For Political Education (IAFPE)
| r*******n
发帖数: 310 | 4 在亚裔或者华裔里面，少数派？站出来说话的反对派就80－20和3个老印组织，支持派
可是18个组织加52个教授或官员。
【在 G*******9 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得Beida101仍然是少数派，在亚裔或者华裔里面。
:
: huge
| z****i
发帖数: 19707 | | r*******n
发帖数: 310 | 6 支持派里其中就有：
Chinese For Affirmative Action
http://www.caasf.org/ | r*******n
发帖数: 310 | 7
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: 支持派里其中就有：
: Chinese For Affirmative Action
: http://www.caasf.org/
| r*******n
发帖数: 310 | 8
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
| r*******n
发帖数: 310 | 9
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
| a*f
发帖数: 1790 | 10 把种族标准加入评判的条件触及了宪法的雷区。有人以为这是优待少数民族，一旦高院
开了这个口子，下面机构很容易把种族用各种理由加入社会中其他的评判条件，少数族
裔损失可能更大。所以高院压倒性多数的通过决议涉及种族标准的解释权在法庭，政府
和机构没有解释权。 | g********0
发帖数: 15010 | 11 实际上，现在高校采用的标准是：优待low represented， 并不是优待少数民族，实
际上就把亚裔（少数民族）排除在外了
【在 a*f 的大作中提到】
: 把种族标准加入评判的条件触及了宪法的雷区。有人以为这是优待少数民族，一旦高院
: 开了这个口子，下面机构很容易把种族用各种理由加入社会中其他的评判条件，少数族
: 裔损失可能更大。所以高院压倒性多数的通过决议涉及种族标准的解释权在法庭，政府
: 和机构没有解释权。
|
|
