3 ms·
> I don't know where you got that idea from but it's not true. There's plenty of precedent that using a proxy for a protected class to discriminate violates the
by nonethewiser 3y ago
> I don't know where you got that idea from but it's not true. There's plenty of precedent that using a proxy for a protected class to discriminate violates the CRA.
You’re assuming unequal outcomes means there is something being used as a proxy for race.
In a merit based system you would take the best students and judge by grades and test scores. This would have unequal outcomes.
- triceratops 3y agoYou don't have to measure outcomes at all. Harvard has had discriminatory admissions criteria in the past. Many axes of discrimination are inherited. Ergo preferring children of Harvard alumni causes that same discrimination, but with a new name ("legacy admission").
- nonethewiser 3y ago> You don't have to measure outcomes at all. I think I compete agree with this. > Harvard has had discriminatory admissions criteria in the past. Many axes of discrimination are inherited. Ergo preferring children of Harvard alumni causes that same discrimination, but with a new name ("legacy admission"). But are you saying legacy admission are unfair or illegal? “Discriminatory” admissions practices are not necessarily illegal (by gender) nor even bad (by grades).
- triceratops 3y agoThey're definitely unfair. The courts will decide if they're illegal. IMO they should be, because they're one step removed from already-illegal discrimination: based on race, religion, ethnicity, and country of origin.