"That means that the way people think about Ricci – and this includes the justices – is in large part shaped not by logic or law but by their attitudes about the world. In particular, it depends on whether they think it is more likely that minority candidates were simply not as good as the whites, or more likely that there was some unintended bias skewing the results. What drives these attitudes, as Holmes knew, is experience. The facts of Ricci are an inkblot in which we all see the pictures life has drawn for us."
Read the rest: Kermit Roosevelt - The Ricci riddle and the law's limits - csmonitor.com
Other posts on the subject worth reading (added as I find 'em):
The history behind Ricci v. DeStefano, the Supreme Court case that will decide who gets the good jobs in cities across America. (3) - By Nicole Allan and Emily Bazelon - Slate Magazine
.gif)
1 comment:
This is an issue that can get very heated and understandably so.
I think that the result was the right one. When someone takes a test, the right answer is the right answer. In school it is the same way. Either an answer is right or it is wrong. There are always conditions like if someone was given a test orally they might have done better etc. They do this in fact, and it's called an IEP. I understand this better than anyone because having a child with Tourettes leads to certain special conditions. He doesn't get really good grades, so should I be upset that he isn't on principals list and everything they've worked so hard for should be null and void?
I'm not sure where I am going with this, just that I understand it from both sides. It's like with affirmative action....Do I want a doctor that is a black man that got pushed through because of AA and isn't as qualified or do I want a white man that finished top of his class and earned his way. I want the most educated and qualified to do his or her job. Wow, maybe I should do a post on this, apparently I have a lot of opinions.....LOL
Post a Comment