US Green Card - Does it help or harm?

[tm_guru]

It goes without saying that if you come from small unknown university x, and you are ranked 5th, and all four of those above you apply to the same program, it is unlikely you will all get accepted!

Even if you are better than the top guy from other unknown unviersity y.

[tm_guru]

Originally Posted by kimbanator

Private schools have significantly more leeway with this. Quoted from Stanford's site:

"The Department receives more than 700 applications per year, and approximately 50 are admitted. The entering class size usually consists of 25 students. On average, approximately 50% of our admits are international students. The Stanford Economics Department is committed to redressing the historic under-representation of women and minority groups in the economics profession."

I think I should sue them as they are basically saying white males have to be 'x amount' better than a female or minority applicant or else the female or minority applicant gets the spot.

I hate reverse discrimination.

Except that I'm not applying to stanford, so...

[JohnMcClane]

The benefit a green card in your case with regards to admission is approximately zero.

[oleador]

Originally Posted by tm_guru

I think a quota, even 'unofficial', would violate the law. They cannot discriminate based on race, religion, sex, or country of origin.

country of origin does not equal citizenship

[tm_guru]

Originally Posted by oleador

country of origin does not equal citizenship

Clearly... I never said it was.

[Katsikaki]

The distinction is important because anti-discrimination principles usually don't apply across the border. While favoring a white citizen over a non-while citizen is against the law, favoring a citizen over a foreigner is not. Hence protectionism against trade and resistance to labor mobility.

Many fellowships do restrict eligibility according to citizenship (not sure about PhDs, but I know for sure with master degrees). Those foundations an donors don't get sued for discrimination.

[tm_guru]

Originally Posted by Katsikaki

The distinction is important because anti-discrimination principles usually don't apply across the border. While favoring a white citizen over a non-while citizen is against the law, favoring a citizen over a foreigner is not. Hence protectionism against trade and resistance to labor mobility.

Many fellowships do restrict eligibility according to citizenship (not sure about PhDs, but I know for sure with master degrees). Those foundations an donors don't get sued for discrimination.

I did say that in my earlier post. Certain funding opportunities are only available for citizens of that country. This is a legal/taxation/immigration issue.

Admission to grad school is merit based. If only because admitting low quality students is not in the school's own interest.

Your citizenship of the US will have many indirect benefits, chief amongst those is that you have shown that you are capable of adapting successfully to another culture and will not quit and return home after the first hellish week you experience.

[walt526]

There was a relatively recent Supreme Court decision that looked at affirmative action-type policies in place at both undergrad and graduate education at U Mich. Basically, it reaffirmed that even public schools were legally permitted to consider an applicant's protected class status in admissions so long as no rigid quotas were in place. Even if the policies are de facto "reverse discrimination," presumably the same framework would apply to "discriminating" between citizens and none citizens. In equal protection cases, race is considered "the ultimate" protected class, so any other class is usually given less consideration than race.

University of Michigan News Service