網頁

星期三, 9月 14, 2022

2022美國最佳大學名單出爐 普林斯頓第一,MIT、哈佛分居二、三

            (Boston Orange 編譯) 美國新聞及世界報導 (US News & World Report) 12日公佈50所全美最佳大學名單,麻州有7所學校名列其中,另有6所學校名列最佳文科學院。

麻省理工學院第二度名列第2,哈佛、史丹福和耶魯並列第3,普林斯頓 (Princeton)則是再次贏得全美第1

麻州內其他的擠入名單大學,有塔芙茨大學,波士頓學院,波士頓大學,依序名列第323641。布蘭岱斯 (Brandeis)和東北 (Northeastern) 大學並列第44,麻州大學Amherst分校和屋斯特理工學院 (WPI)名列第67。克拉克 (Clark)大學第97,西蒙斯 (Simmons)大學第151,麻州大學羅爾分校 (Lowell)176,春田 (Springfield)學院第202,薩福克 (Suffolk) 大學第和麻州大學波士頓分校,麻州大學達特茅斯分校,以及西紐英崙 (West New England)大學同列第234,美國國際學院及Lesley大學同在第331-440明之間。

在最佳文學院部分,麻州有2所再次脫穎而出,威廉斯 (Williams) 學院再次第1,安赫斯特 (Amherst)學院第2,衛斯理 (Wellesley) 學院第5,史密斯 (Smith) 學院第13,聖十字 (Holy Cross)學院第33Mount Holyoke學院第36

其他擠入排名的文學院有Stonehill學院和和Wheaton學院同列第89Hampshire學院第120,麻州文學院 (Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts)130,艾曼紐(Emmanuel)學院和Gordon學院同列第151

在公立大學排名上,加州大學柏克萊 (Berkeley)分校和加州大學洛杉磯 (Los Angeles)分校同居最高位置,麻州大學Amherst分校和德州A&M大學,康州大學同時名列第26

在大學本科的工程系中,所頒發最高學位為博士的麻省理工學院領先群倫,而且麻省理工學院在12項工程科目中,有6項名列第1。位於Needham,不頒發博士學位的Olin工程學院第2

              麻省理工學院大學本科部的企業項目也名列前茅,和加州大學柏克萊分校同時排名第2,在企業領域中的統計及生產營運管理分類中,麻省理學學院排名第1,巴布森 (Babson)學院在創業項目上排名第1,麻省理工學院排名第2

              美國新聞及世界報導稱其排名,是在2022年春季及夏季,分別就17項學術品質,調查了1500所頒發學士學位的大專院校後排出來的。

星期二, 9月 13, 2022

台灣美食大波士頓飄香讓僑胞想念家鄉味道

主辦單位送紀念品感謝2位名廚。右起,潘盟仁,郭競儒僑務委員,孫儉元處長,
李孟潔會長,蔡萬利,潘昭榮主任,龍鳳酒樓老闆梅錫銳。 (周菊子攝)
             (Boston Orange 周菊子麻州報導)僑委會台灣美食國際巡迴講座的波士頓第二場,9日晚在昆士市龍鳳酒樓示範花枝丸製作後,以包括台式醃鮑魚、筍絲燉滷圓蹄膀、客家樹子蒸鮮魚、古早台味佛跳牆等佳餚的成果展,讓台灣僑胞更思鄉的畫下圓滿句點。

潘盟仁()、蔡萬利 ()2位大廚都來過波士頓。 (周菊子攝)
            由波克萊台灣商會,波士頓僑教中心主辦,華僑總會波士頓分會協辦的這第二場台灣美食巡迴講座,不但現場示範花枝丸製作,推出十道大菜晚宴,還請來馬仕威樂隊獻唱,讓包括波士頓經文處,紐英崙中華公所,波士頓安良工商會,欖城安良工商會,新英格蘭台商會、紐英崙客家鄉親會,波士頓台灣同鄉會,波士頓台灣龍舟隊,波士頓台灣人生物科技協會,紐英崙中華專業人員協會,廣教學校等的共約300人,學烹飪,嚐美食,聽好歌,會良友,一晚數得,樂不思蜀。

祝波士頓台北經濟文化辦事處處長孫儉元(右四)率同仁感謝2位大廚到訪。右起潘昭榮
主任,施維鈞組長,
2名大廚潘盟仁,蔡萬利,陳艾芸領事,趙昌倫組長,龍鳳酒樓
老闆梅錫銳。 (周菊子攝)
           波士頓僑務委員,也是承辦單位波克萊台灣商會顧問的郭競儒指出,近年來鮮竽仙,老虎糖等來自台灣手搖飲品在美國大受歡迎,讓人期待藉由僑委會不斷派大廚巡迴教學,教會更多人烹煮台菜後,會有更多人開台菜餐廳,在海外發揚光大台菜文化。

            駐波士頓台北經濟文化辦事處處長孫儉元感謝僑委會派出大廚,讓海外僑胞有機會品嚐到正宗台菜味道。由於10日是中秋節,他也祝到場眾人中秋節快樂。

蔡萬利()有波士頓台灣龍舟隊公關陳奕如()當助手,示範花枝丸製作。大廚潘盟仁
上台傳悄悄話,晚宴得上菜了。 (周菊子攝)
            9日晚的花枝丸製作,由蔡萬利老師示範。他風趣表示,他教大家做Q彈,會跳,完全天然的花枝丸,學會這道菜,就蝦丸、魚丸都會做,可以享受「完美人生」了。

出席成果展晚宴觀眾,紛紛聚攏到示範台前,近距離學習製作花枝丸。 (周菊子攝)
            在波士頓台灣龍舟隊公關陳奕如上台當助手中,蔡萬利指出,做花枝丸,保持材料低溫是一個重點。首先把新鮮或冷凍的花枝切成每片大約3公分寬,吸乾水分後,放點鹽巴,一點點蔥薑汁,基本的調味料,蛋清半顆,然後用調理機打20秒左右,中間加冰塊降溫,加豬油,打到乳化,再加魚漿,增加食材的黏固性,海鮮味,然後加地瓜粉或樹薯粉,加一點點醬油,增加香味,花枝丸的基本材料就做成了。接下來是用湯匙,或者盤子,把花枝擠成圓球,擠掉空氣,丟進鍋裏煮,從第一顆到最後一顆,最好在2分鐘內煮完,以免丸子煮爛了。做好的花枝丸,當天不吃得可以抽真空後,放進冰櫃儲藏。

欖城安良工商會的陳任卓(右三)和元老胡英僚 (左四),會長黃超炎等人特地從羅德島州
來參加盛宴。 (周菊子攝)
            來美多年的台灣同胞歐陽瑞琳表示,很高興聽到蔡萬利老師分享的訣竅,包括煮花枝丸的水要加點鹽巴,才不會讓花枝丸的味道在煮的時候被清水稀釋掉;打花枝漿時要加一點點冰塊降溫,還要加點豬油,才能打得黏稠、乳化。晚宴中頭盤菜餚的九孔,燻鮭魚,雞捲等的擺盤,讓她想起小時候外婆家的辦桌情景,古早台味佛跳牆中的栗子,居然一顆顆都很完整,香菇也一朵朵的好可愛,讓她忍不住要請郭競儒長老向2位大廚致謝。

蔡萬利大廚示範時,觀眾紛紛用手機拍下製作過程。 (周菊子攝)
            波克萊台灣商會會長李孟潔表示,這次的台灣美食巡迴講座能夠辦得成功,不單只要感謝正在慶祝「光輝九十,僑見未來」的僑委會,派了2位大廚來,更要感謝波克萊台灣商會的幹部們分工合作,包括陳玉瑛張羅接待,羅靜春協助採買,李典璋當晚宴司儀,創會會長游勝雄夫婦親臨會場支持,還有波士頓僑教中心主任潘昭榮率同仁的傾力協助。他相信波克萊台商會新幹部們有了這次經驗後,將來辦活動會更駕輕就熟。

(部分內容轉載自僑務電子報: https://ocacnews.net/article/319879?cid=2)

2位大廚,潘盟仁和蔡萬利應邀和馬仕威樂隊合影。 (周菊子攝)

MAYOR WU CHALLENGES 2020 US CENSUS COUNT OF BOSTON

 

MAYOR WU CHALLENGES 2020 US CENSUS COUNT OF BOSTON 

BOSTON - Tuesday, September 13, 2022 - Mayor Michelle Wu today announced that the City of Boston is challenging the United States Census Bureau’s 2020 Census Population count of Boston’s total population. Based on research by the Boston Planning and Development Agency (BPDA), the population count of 675,647 for Boston undercounts significant segments of the City’s college and university student and foreign-born population, and individuals in correctional facilities. Mayor Wu also announced that the City of Boston has applied for a review of the City’s group quarters count through the Post-Census Group Quarters Review (PCGQR) program.


The City’s challenge centers on population count concerns, count case coverage issues, and objections to the racial and ethnic classification changes for the 2020 census. An accurate count of Boston’s population will help inform the needs of Boston’s residents as well as guide the City’s planning for allocation of resources across communities.


“Boston deserves an accurate census count across every neighborhood and community,” said Mayor Michelle Wu. “This count is the foundation to assess the needs of all of our communities, ensuring that Boston receives crucial federal resources, and it should reflect our full numbers.”


"Our Census count is immensely consequential for determining the allocation of public resources, federal grants and assistance programs, and understanding the needs of our communities. I am appreciative of the administration's formal submission of a challenge to our 2020 Census results through Census Bureau programs because we must set the record straight," said Councilor Liz Breadon. "I am particularly concerned by Allston’s reported 5.9 percent loss in total population and 40 percent decline in group quarters population, severely impacted by the early pandemic evacuation of colleges and universities. Correcting the count will help inform the needs of our communities and ensure every Bostonian is reflected."


“I’m relieved that we are challenging the 2020 Census results. My office met with the Administration early on to sound the alarm on how an undercount would unjustifiably lead to our receipt of fewer federal dollars to tackle issues like housing & education. It is vitally important that we are getting accurate census data to help ensure we measure what matters, and what matters most is every person. Undercounting our immigrant population, our students, and our incarcerated residents is a civil rights issue that we must forcefully address. An accurate count of Boston residents will ensure that all our communities, especially our Black & Brown communities that have suffered from decades of disinvestment, get the resources and attention needed to thrive,” said Councilor Ruthzee Louijeune. “Additionally, the U.S. Census Bureau must respect how people identify themselves racially and ethnically. The Census must consider simplifying categorization, particularly for Latino, Brazilian, Middle Eastern and North African respondents, to correctly capture our demographics.”


The City’s challenge centers on concerns related to the group quarters population count, household population count, and objections to the racial and ethnic classification of Boston’s population in the 2020 census; all three of which heavily impacted an accurate and reflective count of Boston’s population.


Group Quarters Population


The City of Boston’s concerns regarding the group quarters population count from the April 1, 2020 Census are due to undercount issues amongst colleges and universities and with Boston’s two correctional facilities.


The COVID-19 pandemic in mid-March 2020 led colleges and universities to evacuate their campuses and move to remote operations before the April count. Data collected from colleges and universities under the University Accountability Ordinance for Fall 2019 show that approximately 6,000 additional students were not accounted for by the 2020 Census redistricting data.


The Suffolk County Department of Corrections records show that their two correctional facilities on April 1, 2020 housed approximately 500 additional residents than reported by the 2020 Census redistricting data.


With an undercount of the group quarters count by approximately 6,500 residents, the City has applied for a review of Boston’s group quarters count through the Post-Census Group Quarters Review (PCGQR) program. Additionally, the City has provided the Census Bureau with administrative records from educational and correctional institutions to support these undercount issues.


Household Population


The City of Boston also has concerns related to the Household Population Count based on low self-response rates that were exacerbated by the pandemic disruptions, an issue that the Census’ operation has failed to adequately address. In the 2010 census, all of Boston’s census tracts' self-response rate exceeded 50 percent. However, in 2020, 29 census tracts – 15 percent of populated Boston tracts – had a self-response rate between 30.0 percent and 49.8 percent. 


Some of these census tracts with lower response rates either have a large share of off-campus students or foreign-born residents. Off-campus students may have left the city due to universities shifting to remote operations, which would have led to them not being able to participate in the Census’ Non-Response Follow-up activity. Other census tracts with lower response rates had larger shares of foreign born residents. Issues such as language barriers and government mistrust, in particular a citizenship question and prevalent anti-immigrant sentiment when count was administered, may have resulted in an undercount.


Currently, the Census Count Question Resolution Program (January 3, 2022 - June 30, 2023) only accepts 2020 census challenges for boundary issues and census processing errors which exclude valid housing and associated population data. Additionally, the Census CQR operation provides no avenue to review an increase in apparent housing unit vacancies. Vacancy rates of housing units increased significantly in Allston, Chinatown, Fenway, Longwood, and South Boston Waterfront, neighborhoods that also have significantly lower Census self-response rates. Thus, pandemic disruptions could have led to many of Boston’s housing units being incorrectly identified as vacant, resulting in an undercount of the City’s population. 


Race Classification


In 2020, the Census reclassified the collection and processing of race and ethnicity data which led to large increases in the “some other race” and “two more races” categories independent of actual demographic or cultural changes. Following this self-reported data on the population’s race and Hispanic origin, the Census Bureau recategorizes this information following prescribed definitions developed in 1997 by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This recent race and ethnicity reclassification, paired with the Census’s recategorization process, heavily impacted Boston’s data. 


As a result of this Census coding, 76 percent of Hispanics in Boston chose (or were assigned) the “some other race” category, either by itself or in addition to other racial categories, up from 45 percent of Hispanics in 2010.   Additionally, respondents listing Brazilian or Cape Verdean origin were reassigned by the U.S. Census Bureau to the “some other race” and respondents that stated a Middle Eastern or North African origin were assigned to the White category respectively. 


Implications of the Census’s (Re)Classification include the following:


  • Multiracial or “other” categories are too heterogeneous to be lumped together for data analysis or policy/program creation.
  • Black and White populations appear smaller while multiracial and “other” populations appear larger. Using single race alone categories may underestimate the number of people who identify as White or Black.
  • A false impression may result that changes are a result of actual demographic or cultural changes in the population not, in great part, a result of reclassification.
  • Respondents who thought their self-identification was recorded by the Census may have been misled.
  • “Origin” and “race” are conflated as respondents listing certain origins are assigned to certain races. For example, Hispanic, Brazilian, and Cape Verdean origins are classified as some other race.


To address these implications, an alternative combined single race/ethnicity was created, tested and recommended in 2015 by the Census Bureau that allows for “Hispanic” and “Middle Eastern and North African” as distinct choices. In 2015, the Census Bureau’s National Content Test Race and Ethnicity Report found that 70% of Hispanics only chose to mark the Hispanic box with the combined question, however this recommended change was not approved by OMB. The City of Boston agrees with the U.S Census Bureau that an alternative single race/ethnicity question would be an overall improvement and will advocate for its adoption in future census and the American Community Survey.


However, the City also urges the Census Bureau to implement two changes on top of adopting a recommended single race/ethnicity question with the aim of improved data collection. First, the City believes that the Census needs to commit to respecting self-identification of respondents since the currently proposed change of a combined alternative would not alter the OMB’s prescribed definition classification. Secondly, the City encourages the Census to facilitate discussion regarding the Bureau’s recategorization, which is rooted in OMB’s prescribed definitions from 1997, with the goal of reflecting real demographic processes

Asian American Civil Rights Groups Release Statement on Biden Administration Final Rule on Public Charge

 Asian American Civil Rights Groups Release Statement on Biden Administration Final Rule on Public Charge

 

Final Rule Restores Decades-Old Definitions, Rolls Back Harmful Trump-era Rule

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Last Friday, the Department of Homeland Security issued a final rule on “public charge,” which will go into effect on December 23, 2022.

 

This final rule addresses longstanding concerns about broad changes to the public charge definition in the last administration, and makes it clear that only the use of specific benefits (Supplemental Security Income (SSI); cash assistance for income maintenance under Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF); State, Tribal, territorial, or local cash benefit programs for income maintenance, sometimes called “General Assistance”; or long-term institutionalization at government expense will have an effect on applications to enter the country or receive a green card. Use of other, non-cash benefits, such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or other nutrition programs, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Medicaid (other than for long-term institutionalization), housing benefits, any benefits related to immunizations or testing for communicable diseases, and more will not be considered.

 

Previous changes to the public charge rule created widespread fear about the possible negative immigration consequences of seeking public benefits. This rule helps clarify that our communities can seek help from necessary programs like health, nutrition, and housing programs without fear.

 

Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Chicago, and Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California who are members of an affiliation of five independent civil rights organizations, releases the following statement:

 

“The previous ‘public charge’ rule was cruel by design. It was not only meant to favor white and wealthy immigrants applying for admission or a green card, but also aimed to create fear and confusion about the use of critical, life-saving programs within low-income communities of color. Tragically, the issuance of the last rule caused many immigrants of color, including Asian Americans, to withdraw from health care, nutrition programs, housing services, and other benefits.

 

This new final rule, by contrast, seeks to simplify the public charge test, to minimize misunderstandings about the scope of the rule and make it clear what benefits usage may affect immigration status. Advancing Justice is thankful that our advocacy, and that of our communities and allies, has contributed to this reversal in policy. Asian Americans Advancing Justice will continue to advocate for an immigration system that does not penalize the use of needed public benefits.”

 

Immigrants concerned about how the new public charge rule will affect them or their loved ones should seek advice from an authorized immigration attorney or accredited legal representative.

星期一, 9月 12, 2022

美國總統拜登在羅根機場宣揚基礎建設法 聯邦州市政要雲集助陣

美國總統拜登 (Joe Biden)抵達波士頓,在羅根機場E終點站,宣佈聯邦政府不分黨派的
基礎建設法撥款6200萬元給羅根機場翻修,整建門面。 (周菊子攝(
              (Boston Orange 周菊子波士頓綜合報導) 美國總統拜登 (Joe Biden) (12) 日在羅根機場宣佈,聯邦政府通過的不分黨派基礎建設法,將撥款6200萬元給羅根機場,翻修國際航線E終點站,這是聯邦政府撥給85個機場的維修經費中,金額最大的一筆。

 6200萬元中有5000萬元將用於更新國際航班終點站,另1200萬元將用於修繕機場一帶道路。拜登總統表示估計相關工程可創造5900個工作機會。 

由右向左,麻州州長Charlie Baker,聯邦參議員 Elizbeth Warren, Ed Markey,聯邦眾議員Lori
Trahan,美國勞工部部長Marty Walsh,以及(第二排右起(聯邦眾議員Ayanna Pressley,
Katherine Clark等麻州的重量級政要都在座。 (周菊子攝)
                   搭乘空軍1號專機抵達波士頓的拜登總統,此行另一要務是到位於多徹斯特的約翰甘迺迪總統圖書館(John F. Kennedy Presidential Library) ,宣佈癌症登月計畫 (Cancer Moonshot Initiative) ,希望在未來25年間,把患癌致死人數減少一半以上,同時為照顧病患者及癌症倖存者提供更多支援。拜登總統的兒子 Beau 2015年逝於癌症。 

今年也正好是約翰甘迺迪總統1962年在休士頓萊斯 (Rice)大學發表登月計畫的60週年。 

波士頓市長吳弭 (Michelle Wu)致詞。 (周菊子攝)
                      拜登總統在羅根機場E終點站翻修工地中,向數百名趕到現場的聯邦及州市政要和勞工代表們說,1974年落成啟用的羅根機場,當年只服務1400萬名國際旅客,但是到2019年時,使用這一機場進出的旅客人數,增加4倍,大約4200萬人,在新冠病毒疫情發生前,已是美國第16大機場的羅根機場,是為地方上醫療器材,科技產品等各行各業服務的樞紐,翻修更新羅根機場,將不只使得麻州這美國門面更為美觀,還勢將帶動地方上的經濟成長。 

重量級政要都坐在觀眾席左側。 (周菊子攝)
                       拜登在大約半小時的演說中,有如競選般的慷慨陳詞,直言美國人的失敗在他看來是想的不夠宏偉,甚至還質疑起美國是否真能做些甚麼事,但美國必須記得自己的身分地位,投資基礎建設,就能刺激就業機會成長。美國境內沒有一個機場能擠進全世界前25名,才給人美國開始衰退的印象。但藉由投資進基礎建設,他相信美國人正在重建更好的美國。 

今日出席的政要包括麻州州長查理貝克 (Charlie Baker) ,波士頓市長吳弭 (Michelle Wu) ,聯邦參議員Elizabeth WarrenEd Markey,聯邦眾議員Katherine Clark Ayanna   Pressley Steven    LynchBill KeatingJake AuchinclossLori TrahanSeth Moulton,以及麻州參議員Lydia Edwards,麻州眾議員Adrian C. Madaro都在拜登總統出現前,一一致詞。 

曾任波士頓市市長的美國勞工部部長Marty Walsh,也側身在座,但未上台講話。

華人前進會出席代表和政要合影。左起,鄺寶蓮,湯建華,聯邦參議員Elzabeth Warren,
李素影,聯邦眾議員 Ayanna Pressley,波士頓市長吳弭,華人前進會代表,余翠鳳,
波士頓教師工會會長唐佳宇,麻州參議員Lydia Edwards。 (華人前進會提供)
                   到場的波士頓市市議員有Gabriela "Gigi" Coletta,Kenzie Bok Erin Murphy。波士頓市市長幕僚長朱為婷 (Tiffany Chu) ,平等及包容長Mariangely Solis Cervera。今日就任的聯邦關係主任Sam Hyun也出席了活動。

波士頓教師工會會長唐佳宇 (Jessica Tang) ,曾任波士頓海港協會主任的李威儀 (Vivian L)也在座。

                                            波士頓華人社區中有華人前進會名譽主席李素影,共同主席湯建華,行政主任陳玉珍,工作人員鄺寶蓮、余翠鳳等人出席。

AAJC, LatinoJustice, and BR File Amicus Brief Defending Equitable Admissions Plan for Boston’s Selective High Schools External Inbox

 Boston, MA – Brown Rudnick LLP, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, and Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC filed an amicus brief in the First Circuit Court of Appeals last Friday in support of Boston’s School Committee as it defends an admissions plan to expand access to the city’s top-ranked “exam schools.”

The amicus brief, which has been joined by 16 prominent national and local organizations (listed below), addresses the admissions policy to three Boston Exam Schools: the Boston Latin School, the Boston Latin Academy, and the John D. O’Bryant School of Mathematics and Science. 
 
The Boston Exam Schools (the “Schools”) are among the highest ranked public schools in the nation. The Schools are renowned for their academic rigor and excellence, superior resources, and higher rates of graduation and attendance at four-year colleges as compared to Boston’s other public schools. As a result, every seat is highly coveted. Each school accepts students for grades 7 and 9, and accepted students stay on through the completion of high school. Historically, the Schools have disproportionately enrolled students from Boston’s high-income neighborhoods. As a result, low-income students, including Black, Asian American, and Latinx students, have been consistently underrepresented at the Schools.   
             

The admissions plan, developed for the 2021-22 academic year, eliminated an entrance exam due to the pandemic. Instead, the plan allocated seats based on a combination of GPA and the number of school-age children living in each of Boston’s 29 zip codes. The plan improved racial and socioeconomic diversity at the highly selective public schools by increasing the number of students admitted from Boston’s lowest-income neighborhoods.

The Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence, which represents a group of White and Asian American parents from high-income ZIP codes, opposes the plan. The coalition filed suit last year in a Massachusetts federal court arguing that the use of ZIP codes as a factor in admissions was unconstitutional and would disfavor White and Asian American students.

In April 2021, U.S. District Judge William Young ruled in favor of the Boston School Committee, which drew support from an amicus brief that Brown Rudnick and LatinoJustice filed together with Massachusetts Law Reform Institute and the Children’s Law Center of Massachusetts. The coalition appealed the decision to the First Circuit and sought to halt the implementation of the plan pending resolution of the appeal.

A three-judge panel denied the request, finding that the plan’s use of a socioeconomic measure to achieve greater racial diversity in those schools is likely constitutional.

In June 2022, the coalition filed its opening brief in the First Circuit, arguing that the Appeals Court should reverse the lower court’s judgment because the admissions plan had an alleged adverse impact on White and Asian American applicants to the Schools. In response, this amicus brief disputes the coalition’s claim that ZIP codes are a proxy for race in the admissions plan due to the increasingly multiethnic diversity within Boston’s neighborhoods, including within the Asian American community. The brief argues that the School Committee’s attention to equity in developing the admissions plan is grounded in Equal Protection jurisprudence. The brief also demonstrates that the coalition’s assertion of a disparate impact on White and Asian American students is flawed because the coalition improperly relies on the wrong comparator to assess impact. 

A link to the brief can be found here.

“The Coalition has distorted Boston’s history of racial segregation and mischaracterized important precedents that found that the Exam schools had clearly discriminated against Black and Latinx students in the past,” said Francisca Fajana, Director of Racial Justice Strategy at LatinoJustice PRLDEF. “The court must take this crucial historical context into account as it considers the Coalition’s specious claim that using ZIP codes as part of an admissions plan serves as a proxy for racial discrimination. It is not. We endorse the Boston School Committee’s commitment to equalizing educational opportunity for low-income students, regardless of their racial background or the neighborhood in which they live.”     

“School districts should be able to address existing inequities in educational opportunities and expand access for all students, including low-income Black, Latinx, and Asian American students,” said Eri Andriola, Staff Attorney, Litigation, at Advancing Justice – Asian American Justice Center. “All students, no matter their background or ZIP code, deserve a fair opportunity to access high-quality education.”

“This appeal is a reminder that the struggle for educational equality is far from over,” said Melanie Burke, Counsel at Brown Rudnick. “Through this amicus brief, we are doubling down in the fight for equal access to high-quality education for Boston students from all backgrounds and parts of the city.

麻州、波士頓紀念911 及殞落消防員 (圖片)