43% of Harvard's White Students are ALDC Admits

[sanantone]

I don't know if you're just being dishonest or if you can't remember your own arguments. You said:

"Your narrative is incoherent. If SFFA truly wanted to win on behalf of Asians regardless of the impact on White applicants, they would have targeted all admissions preferences that negatively impact Asian applicants who are trying to gain admission based on merit. They probably would have won this case in the lower courts years ago if they didn't have a hidden agenda."

You're clearly implying they're some sort of secret white supremacist organization.

I read the case. I actually read the briefs. I understand the arguments. Before you get yourself tied in a knot of sophistry, perhaps you could support your argument that SFFA is arguing for "disparate impact." Their briefs expressly state they aren't arguing disparate impact.

My claim was simply challenging the claim you laid out above, that removing ALDC preferences would reduce the number of white students. You even stated that the reduction in white admits was the reason SFFA wasn't challenging ALDC.

Don't you think its a bit absurd to accuse me of Dunning Kruger when you haven't even read the briefs of the case you've been arguing about for months? You have absolutely no understanding of the underlying legal issue, yet continue to repeat your uniformed opinions, backed by such scholarly sources as Business Insider.

I certainly hope your PhD is in one of the social "sciences." Perhaps you're just a bit too close to this AA issue to see things clearly.

A hidden agenda automatically means white supremacy? Do you even know what white supremacy means? You don't seem to be very strong in vocabulary. Someone of superior intellect wouldn't need ALDC preferences. If a white supremacist thought they needed ALDC preferences, they wouldn't be a very good white supremacist. 

Clearly, you haven't read all of the documents going back to 2014, and a brief is not an entire case. LOL. Read the court opinions and supporting documents. 

In Grutter v. Ballinger, the Supreme Court set a precedent that diversity is a compelling interest for college admissions. Of course, the current justices could overrule that precedent, and I am confident Justice Thomas is against it based on his opinion in the Fisher case. But, your assertion that diversity can't be considered a compelling interest is demonstrably incorrect.  

If you're going to challenge a claim, why would you challenge it with an old claim that's already been determined to be unsubstantiated? How is that a good strategy? 

You're hilarious. A person who can't read well and makes all of these incorrect assumptions thinks that his or her opinion on someone's intelligence matters. It seems to really bother you that I am a PhD student for some strange reason. You've mentioned it probably about a dozen times. It's a weird obsession. For your information, I have business, social science, information systems, and life science degrees. Now, who or what would I believe regarding my intelligence? My test scores in elementary school that led to me being placed in honors classes in middle school? My academic performances in my pre-AP and AP classes in high school? My above average SAT scores? My superior GRE scores? All of the times I was one of the or the top scorer on civil service tests? My excellent job performance evaluations? Or, would I believe a stranger online who has inferior verbal intelligence? Why would someone who has always performed better than most students academically, including White students, need AA for college admissions? And, have you never advocated for less fortunate people? Maybe that's not in your character. According to your logic, if someone argues for a policy that helps poor people, that advocate must be poor. However, in this case, I am not even arguing for underqualified students to be admitted based on race. I am arguing that the impact of these policies is being exaggerated and that other policies with disparate impact are mostly being ignored. 

Law is a humanities field that requires high verbal intelligence to do well in. Maybe that's why you're struggling with it.