West Point sued over affirmative action admissions

The local slate is not the end of the competition between candidates.
Well aware of that. Since there are hundreds of MOC slates, it is the most likely scenario where two candidates might have the same number of WCS points and one is appointed while the other is not. It could also occur with Qualified Alternates for the 150th spot.

The path for most candidates is: Congressional & Senatorial MOC's (3 slates) -> Qualified Alternate (1 chance by order of merit for 150 slots) -> Additional Appointee

Most MOC slate winners are determined by USMA admissions by order of merit, as are the QA's. I assume the crux of the lawsuit deals with how AA's are determined, but it would be enlightening to see how ties are resolved on competitive slates.
 
One of the "challenges" of the WPM is that it is whatever Admissions wants it to be. It can change every year. IOW, the formula can be tweaked to get the desired outcome. Let's say, for example, that you have determined that a large percentage of a racial or ethnic group that you want to increase at a SA will have candidates who are the first in their family to attend college. You can then give that attribute (first in family to attend college) a lot of value in the WPM. Or, you know that a high percentage work to support their families. You give that attribute a lot of value.

One would argue that you're not favoring a group; instead, you're seeking people with unique backgrounds. However, you may be doing so not b/c you really want people who are first generation college attendees but rather because it increases the percentage of a certain group.

Sane people see the benefits of a diverse officer corps. We also know that certain groups have historically been disadvantaged in SA admissions as well as in this country generally (and some of the latter persists today). The question is how to address the above without disadvantaging other highly qualified young men and women.

IMO, the first question is to consider what would happen with blind admissions WRT race and ethnicity. Would we see a drop in numbers? Maybe not, which would terrific. If so, why is that? What element(s) are causing some otherwise desirable diverse candidates to be less competitive? Then figure what to do about that -- do other elements of the application make up for those?
 
If two candidates are equal, the legal argument goes away.

As a private employer - if two candidates are equal, I have no problem hiring one that is from an underrepresented class. I did as an employer.
But the trouble isn't that there are two eq
 
Here's my 2 cents worth. There are definitive standards of being qualified. Once you are qualified it is someone's opinion as to who is "more qualified". It's subjective. At that point it is based upon what someone deems as more important.
In my mind being qualified is like being pregnant....you are or you aren't.

I firmly believe, with no proof, that they definitely try to make things as diverse as they possibly can without putting out quotas to meet. Just like enlisted did with moving recruiting centers into certain neighbor hoods so recruitment was more diverse.
 
(Sorry, need to quit my job in order to post here properly.)

But the trouble isn't that there are two equal candidates. They are never truly equal unless they went to the same schools and got the same grades and had the same ECs. But the real problem is that there are hundreds of applicants and the aggrieved party only needs to find one below him to make a comparison. If I don't admit Joe that's ranked in the 87% in December how can I allow in anyone else at 88% later in the cycle without getting sued by Joe? They either need to go to a lot of subjective criteria (that they can be sued over) or a straight formula that can be calculated (and fought over in the courts.) Not loving this modern American approach of solving everything in the courts.
 
Here's my 2 cents worth. There are definitive standards of being qualified. Once you are qualified it is someone's opinion as to who is "more qualified". It's subjective. At that point it is based upon what someone deems as more important.
In my mind being qualified is like being pregnant....you are or you aren't.

I firmly believe, with no proof, that they definitely try to make things as diverse as they possibly can without putting out quotas to meet. Just like enlisted did with moving recruiting centers into certain neighbor hoods so recruitment was more diverse.
That was my point above about having max values for things like test scores or grades. Just score folks on a seven point scale or something. 33+ on the ACT is max points. 3.8 in AP-like curriculum or 3.95 without gets you top score, period. drop the nuance and give them get a checkmark for Qualified and when they get into The Pool they can all start from the same spot, maybe without the academic records attached at all. 87% Joe and 88% Michael can both be qualified and you won't know the percentages when picking between them.
 
Here's my 2 cents worth. There are definitive standards of being qualified. Once you are qualified it is someone's opinion as to who is "more qualified". It's subjective. At that point it is based upon what someone deems as more important.
In my mind being qualified is like being pregnant....you are or you aren't.

I firmly believe, with no proof, that they definitely try to make things as diverse as they possibly can without putting out quotas to meet. Just like enlisted did with moving recruiting centers into certain neighbor hoods so recruitment was more diverse.
That may be correct for other institutions, but it is not correct for USMA.
  • There is a definitive standard for both "qualified" and "more qualified", WCS points. That is the objective standard by which candidates are measured against each other, and by that standard the candidate with a higher WCS score is more qualified. It also allows that there can be two candidates that are equally qualified.
  • As USNA1985 pointed out, the criteria can be tweaked using correlated factors to give extra weight to certain groups, although the morality and ethics of doing so is questionable. That is how the University of California system bypassed the ballot measure that California voters approved to ban affirmative action, thereby retaining race based preferences.
 
The notion that West Point uses affirmative action (as presumed by this lawsuit) to fill out its incoming classes is flawed at best. Since joining the Field Force, I have more visibility in how the process works. The primary takeaway is that West Point (cannot speak to other SAs) does not appoint unqualified candidates. The lawsuit would have to argue that presumably minorities are being offered appointment over "more qualified" candidates. But every candidate has to meet any number of qualifications. The lawsuit also completely overlooks the fact that if members of Congress wanted to circumvent this issue, they can rank their nominees according to their own interests.

All that is to say, diversity at the Service Academies is not a bad thing. And it is not the primary factor driving admissions decisions. I doubt the plaintiffs in this lawsuit have ever spent time with cadets and understand how ridiculous their underlying notions about this issue are.
You are really clueless to think there is not affirmative action used at the service academies and throughout the military. I know former USNA Admissions Officers who openly admit they use preferential treatment for minorities and its even more egregious when it comes to admitting underqualified athletes.
 
Thoughtful insights.

I was commissioned in ‘78. Until I retired 26 years later, there was not one woman above me in my chain of command all the way up to CNO, until my last tour, when I was privileged to work for VADM Patricia Tracey, the first woman in any service to put on 3 stars. She had been a mentor of mine, along with a few other senior women, remotely, in the sense there were so few, and you met them, and they offered to be a sounding board for you, you contacted them when you needed to. For everyday mentoring in the workplace, for things big and small, it was the male senior officers (and definitely the male chiefs, senior chiefs and master chiefs when I was a JO) who were my mentors and professional development coaches. I was grateful for the ones who mentored regardless of gender, skin color, ethnicity. They were focused on performance as an officer. I can close my eyes and think about CWO4 Roy Perez, LCDR Steve Flood, BTCM Higgins (his first name was Master Chief to me, and he was Black, and his lessons in deckplate leadership were gold, and his empathy for knowing how it felt to not be in the majority was powerful), and so many other Dept heads, XOs, COs, Chiefs of Staff, flag officers over the years. Sure, I encountered my share of those with a severe case of Disinclination In Mentoring Women In The Service (had to work for that acronym), but there were enough right-minded officers to carry on the work of developing those who came behind them. I also mentored without regard to whatever label or category might apply. That was my duty and also a great source of professional pleasure. I now volunteer with two non-profits mentoring military members in career transition out of the military through coaching calls, for the same reasons. (For my veteran friends here, if you haven’t already checked them out, Veterati and American Corporate Partners.)

I find today’s mix of people in the service to be energizing. One day, none of it will matter.
Carol Mutter USMC was the first female 3 star in the U.S. military (1996)
 
Carol Mutter USMC was the first female 3 star in the U.S. military (1996)
You are absolutely correct -meant to say USN, and at the time of her retirement, was the most senior female officer in all services. Thank you! Conflationitis attack. I had the privilege of meeting General Mutter many times.
 
Last edited:
Another angle: Each MOC can have up to 5 constituents attending an Academy “charged” to them at any given time. Because of the Senate, lower population states have more MOCs per capita and these are also the whitest states. The applicant from Utah may have somewhat of an advantage over one from California, Florida, or Georgia, all else equal. I believe an old Congressional Research Service report raised this as a concern.

Of course the Academies only admit people that they deem to be “qualified”, whatever that means to them. But some mids and cadets are separated every year for academics, conduct, PRT, etc so clearly its not perfect. And who is “most qualified” certainly does matter if the goal is merit based admissions.

Diversity can be a great thing. But attempting to rectify past discrimination against some minorities with new discrimination against a different minority is not the way to achieve it.
You are really clueless to think there is not affirmative action used at the service academies and throughout the military. I know former USNA Admissions Officers who openly admit they use preferential treatment for minorities and its even more egregious when it comes to admitting underqualified athletes.
True. Whether it’s something that should be kept or not is something people can debate. But that it’s happening is indisputable and the Academies acknowledge it. Hence why all those retired flag officers wrote an amicus brief defending it for the Court to consider.
 
... hope this is politically correct. I looked up the class portraits for both USNA and USMA from 2005 to 2012. I don't have the exact numbers but I remember it was almost constant. White = close to 850-950; Non White = close to 250-350.
 
... hope this is politically correct. I looked up the class portraits for both USNA and USMA from 2005 to 2012. I don't have the exact numbers but I remember it was almost constant. White = close to 850-950; Non White = close to 250-350.
Which reflects the US population.
 
Because of the Senate, lower population states have more MOCs per capita and these are also the whitest states.
Like Hawaii and New Mexico? Both are pretty small population wise (2 and 3 congressional districts) and seem to be pretty minority-heavy.
 
Like Hawaii and New Mexico? Both are pretty small population wise (2 and 3 congressional districts) and seem to be pretty minority-heavy.
New Mexico checking in. Certainly not the whitest state lol!

It is “easier” I think to get slated for USNA here as no one has ever heard of it (tho c/o 27 put up 7 plebes, doubling the overall number on the Yard) WP has more, but due to proximity and all of the USAF/USSF here, USAFA is the game in town.

Edited to add - USNA needs to do -more- outreach to states like mine. It’s truly wild to me that in a state with the highest per capita enlistment/commission of any state I mention Annapolis and no one knows what I’m talking about.
 
Last edited:
New Mexico checking in. Certainly not the whitest state lol!

It is “easier” I think to get slated for USNA here as no one has ever heard of it (tho c/o 27 put up 7 plebes, doubling the overall number on the Yard WP has more, but due to proximity and all of the USAF/USSF here, USAFA is the game in town.
Yet they will use the statistics to show USNA isn’t diversified?
 
Yet they will use the statistics to show USNA isn’t diversified?
Of that I am sure. Lies, damn lies and statistics and all that.

If anything, looking at the Mids of NM, including my kid, NM is repping diversity well. And at least based on the Mids I’ve met, all of them are absolutely qualified.
 
It's as old as the now graduating class, and, frankly, not an easy Friday night bedtime read. But I appreciate @mike1979 for posting. I welcome more recent studies. If there aren't any, there should be. We should always be examining things that involve our tax dollars.
 
Back
Top