Oh they effectively do have quota systems. They just call it something else to avoid legal trouble. It's like with the Affordable Care Act that created a penalty for those that didn't have health insurance, and to get around such an illegal law they referred to it as a "tax."Belindi wrote: ↑January 26th, 2018, 4:46 pm From "Grutter v Bollinger:
Frost, note that there was no quota system.ruled that the University of Michigan Law School had a compelling interest in promoting class diversity. The Court held that a race-conscious admissions process that may favor "underrepresented minority groups", but that also took into account many other factors evaluated on an individual basis for every applicant, did not amount to a quota system that would have been unconstitutional under Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.
What is common today is simply to compare the racial diversity to the population and any discrepancy is taken to be prima facie evidence of discrimination, permitting discrimination of any "over-represented" groups. In this U.S. this has traditionally been whites, but now it is increasing occurring against Asians.