Competition, when everyone has a fair shake to compete, encourages excellence and improvement.
By allowing those who do the work and show the promise to get an education that matches their abilities, maximizes their potential. In addition, it sets a goal to work towards and attain and encourage improvement among people to attend these schools, if they make it a priority or concern.
"Equity" is the new buzzword to give political cover to not tackling issues in the system and instead sweep them under the rug. It's insulting that racial justice and social justice style language is used by politicians so they can perform Amsterdam from The Wire like policies to cover up bad numbers and not address issues. If folks aren't meetingg the standards to attend these schools and if some groups are impacted more than others, if it can be shown they aren't being shutout simply because they are a member of a group, then there is nothing wrong with these specific schools. The issue, and it's a harder one to solve and why they do shyt like this, is what resources and behaviors are missing and maybe need to be addressed to allow these kids to compete better.
The thing is, I don't think the public is asking for this. It's these politicians who have decided to do this for their own sake because they don't want to tackle disparities at the root level. It's easier to hide the problem.
Any son/daughter I have, I will probably always push them to do their best and I would work with them to improve where they are weak and help maximize their strengths. If for example, my son wants to play basketball and he tries out and fails to join a team. My next step isn't to get rid of the basketball team or get rid of the standards to get in. I would be like "alright we need to work on xyz and improve your skills here" and we try again hopefully with better results.