Affirmative action can be generally understood as a tool used to redress any kind of discrimination towards the traditionally underrepresented groups of people such as women and African American (The Leadership Conference n.d.). However, it is very difficult to make very clear definition of the term affirmative action, because it is not a single policy, it is rather the combination of the government legislation and court rulings that changes frequently with decisions of governments and courts. In addition to this, affirmative action may be used in different areas such as education, employment and so on (Harry J. Holzer 2000). This essay will mainly focus on the affirmative action at the workplace and education. In these cases affirmative …show more content…
The main critique is that the affirmative action policies can cause reverse discrimination when they benefit minorities at the expense of the majority groups. For the first time the affirmative action was challenged by the US Supreme Court in the Regents Univerity of California in 1978. The university had the affirmative action program that allowed to enroll in each class sixteen “qualified” minority students out of a one hundred class. The white candidate, Allan Bakke, was rejected twice whereas his peer from the minority group was admitted despite he had lower results than Allan Bakke. He maintained that affirmative action policies violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution which says that all citizens should have an equal protection of law. However, the court ruled out that the affirmative action policy is constitutional and can be used as a one of many factors in admissions processes. However, it should not be zero-sum, where the increased opportunities for the minorities come at the expense of the majority groups ( Brunner and Rowen …show more content…
The report made by the Central Foundation says that the racial-based affirmative action programs in the university admissions might disappear very soon. Some states in the USA that used to have affirmative action policies are now banning it because of the voting results, rulings of the Supreme Court and government legislation (Richard D. Kahlenberg, Racial Affirmative Action in Higher Education May Be on Its Way Out 2013). According to the data the racial preferential treatment is not very popular among the voters. Five out of the six states, where the referendum on the anti-racial treatment was held, resulted in banning affirmative action policies towards race. So in 1996 the California state, in 1998 the Washington state , in 2006 the Michigan state, in 2008 the state of Nebraska and more recently in 2010 the Arizona state abandoned the racial preferential treatment. This list is continuing to increase as time passes (Richard D. Kahlenberg, Racial Affirmative Action in Higher Education May Be on Its Way Out 2013). More recently, In February 2014, the Supreme Court supported Michigan law which banned the preferential treatment programs towards race in all public universities and colleges in Michigan ( Brunner and Rowen
Though in Grutter v. Bollinger we deal with the 14th amendment of the Equal Protection Clause and racial classifications too, the way race is used is slightly differs. In this particular case, the court had to decide whether the use of race at the Univeristy of Michigan Law School during the admissions process violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. Barbara Grutter, a Caucasian applicant, applied to the University of Michigan in 1996 with a 3.8 GPA and a score of 161 on her LSAT. Grutter was placed on the waitlist, but was subsequently denied admission to the school. Grutter claims that she was only denied because of her race, as the University uses race as a factor in the admission process.
n the Supreme Court case University of California v. Bakke in 1978, Allan Bakke, a white applicant, was denied admission to the University of California, Davis Medical School because he was white, although he had great MCAT, GPA, and test scores he was denied twice, because the school was using “racial quotas” during admission and had “reserved 16 out of 100 seats in its entering class for minorities, including "Blacks," "Chicanos," "Asians," and "American Indians"’’("Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. " West's Encyclopedia). Bakke sued the University of California for using “racial quotas” as well as claiming that the schools admission processes was a violation of “Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fourteenth
The second case filed against the University of Michigan is Grutter v. Bollinger (2003). The suit was filed by non-minority applicants who alleged the university for using race as the prevailing factor in admitting students and therefore violated the Equal Protection Clause, Title VI and Section 1981 (Green, 2004, p. 144). In their defense, the University of Michigan argued that the university seeks to ensure their ability to make unique contributions to the character of the student body by enrolling a “meaningful number” of underrepresented minority students (Green, 2004, p. 147). In contrast to the Gratz case, the district court did not follow Justice Powell’s rationale in the Bakke case and the district court ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
Katznelson’s argument that affirmative action policies were enacted with purposeful, deliberate discrimination is convincing. Namely, he considers the historical context that would have shaped Americans at the time and swayed their opinions. For example, Katznelson references the Civil War and the end of slavery, and how these events shaped the attitudes of key players like the Southern Democrats, which would then result in the faulty policies that perpetuated affirmative action’s favoritism of whites. His evidence is sufficient as well. Katznelson highlights the trend of Southern Democrats interfering in affirmative action policies and the footholds they had in specific acts.
The Supreme Court made a mistake when they decided with the University of Texas; no college should take in race as a factor when selecting applications of students. In 2007, two female high school students applied to the University of Texas; one of the girls being Miss Abigail N. Fisher. Abigail was a caucasian, in the top 12% of her school at Stephen Austin High School, but she was denied by the University of Texas along with a friend of her’s. However,
Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, the Supreme Court decided that the amendment of Michigan’s Constitution which banned affirmative action at public institutions was constitutional. Prior to the enactment of this law, Michigan residents had voted in favor of the proposed amendment that prohibited consideration of race or sex in admissions to Michigan’s public universities. In turn, the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigration Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary, sued state officials-- arguing that this amendment violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth
In the end the Supreme Court supported the lawfulness of affirmative action, but restricted its practice. The court’s ruling
In Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that a university 's use of racial "quotas" in its admissions process was unconstitutional, but a school 's use of "affirmative action" to accept more minority applicants was constitutional in some circumstances. " The college was asked to at least consider blacks in the admittance of college and they were asked to not use quotas in the admission
Public colleges and universities in the United States use a variety of factors to determine which students will be accepted. Universities often want a student body with diverse academic interests, talents, and backgrounds. They consider factors such as applicants’ grades, standardized test scores, community service, athletic or musical ability, and geographic location. Sometimes, universities also consider an applicant’s race or ethnicity. This case is about whether the University of Texas-Austin’s admissions policies violate the Fourteenth Amendment and its guarantee of equal protection.
A large number of legal arguments in Alabama have stated that a high number of African-American students were placed in special education programs, created supposedly just for physically and mentally challenged students with special needs. Another unintended effect made by the Brown decision was on that of higher education. Plans were created to ensure that education among minorities was equal. But those plans have deteriorated the quality of admission standards that are so critical to education equality. The federal guidelines had sought out the increase of minority enrollment, but instead have resulted in the establishment of a quota system.
Perhaps one way of defining and understanding the concept of white male privilege is to imagine that a white male walks through life with an invisible duffle bag full of unearned rights and privileges that a white male alone enjoys. These privileges are said to exist as these white males have something of value that is denied to others simply because of the groups they belong to, versus anything, in particular, they have either failed to do or have actually done. Because other groups do not walk through life with this invisible duffle bag full of unearned rights and privileges, Affirmative Action policies were initiated to provide those without an invisible duffle bag, a visible one; thus, allowing all to walk through life equally. In regards
This debate fought a discrimination with the doctrine of “separate but equal” (Gale). It explains how the Jim Crow impacted of the debate on affirmative
At least four Supreme Court justices believe that affirmative action is unconstitutional. Chief Justice John Roberts has said that “the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race”. This viewpoint offers no differentiation between “race consciousness” and “racism”, but is a quite common opinion. This sort of viewpoint is what may drive America towards class-based rather than race-based affirmative action. Because of the disparities in income and wealth, minorities are as likely as whites to benefit under a class-based policy.
According to the dominant theory the affirmative action was firstly introduced to deal with two types of social disruption in the 1960s as campus protests and urban riots in the North. However, this article is based on different theory as dominant theory's empirical evidence is limited. It examines the initial reason for advent of race-conscious affirmative action in 17 undergraduate institutions in the United States. And according to the research this article concludes that there were two waves that contributed to affirmative action: 1) first wave in the early 1960s introduced by northern college administrators 2) second wave in the late 1960s introduced as a response to the protests of campus-based students. This article will help me to establish the main reasons for introduction of race-conscious affirmative action in undergraduate
Throughout many of the affirmative action legal cases, one of the main arguments from proponents is that it is necessary in order to right the wrongs of past racial discrimination. Some say that affirmative action is justified because even though white applicants may be more qualified, this is only because they did not face the same hardships as their minority counterparts (Rachels, Ethics, 1973). Many argue if we do not integrate disadvantaged minorities into mainstream social institutions, they will continue to suffer the discrimination that has plagued our country for centuries and that this is detrimental to not only the minorities but also society as a whole (Anderson, 2002, 1270–71). However, the debate has recently shifted to the benefits of diversity in the classroom which the Supreme Court has affirmed as being a positive thing