The issue of affirmative action, here in the United States, is arguably one of the most controversial subjects in today’s society. This issue has also been known to be one of the least understood concepts as well, causing much debate and a divided nation. There are different opinions out there on whether affirmative action is really helping America put the past behind them when it comes to discrimination or is it simply violating American core values. What is affirmative action? Affirmative action is ‘an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, especially in relation to employment or education; positive discrimination’ It ensures companies, universities and other high cooperation’s to establish programs that …show more content…
A lawsuit was filed and eventually made it to the US Supreme Court in which they found the admission policy violated the Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment of Gratz and Hamacher. Prior to this case, most colleges and universities stated diversity is an integral component to a successful institution. They weren 't really sure how far they could push this issue during the admission process as it was considered a gray area. The US Supreme Courts decision in the University of Michigan 's case clarified this gray area on affirmative action policies. The university of Michigan ended up "banning" Affirmative Action for minorities. A lawsuit then resulted, and it was held in Supreme Court. A 6-2 vote from the court system "backed" the University of Michigan for their ban of affirmative action. This was a very controversial lawsuit, and was followed by many. Minorities attending the University of Michigan have dwindled heavily over the years since …show more content…
I am hopeful that affirmative action will be a way of the past soon enough. Diversity is important and does have its place. I do see the need to include different races/ ethnicities/ sexes in one 's team of employment. I do believe that the applicants should never be hired based on only these factors. They should meet the standards that everyone else must meet. Any hiring procedure other than this creates animosity among the employees. My friend who is a Cambridge Police officer told me about an incident were he observed ‘equal opportunity’ in play. He said during the swim test portion of the physical testing, all applicants were instructed to jump into a pool and swim two laps back and forth. Applicants were told that they would be timed and the scores would be a part of the application. Basically anyone at this point that could not swim back and forth would be disqualified. He observed a minority that was holding onto the side of the pool because he could not swim. One of the instructors told him, ‘I don 't care what you do but you need to get from one side of the pool to the other’. I was surprised when he told me this because officers pretty much perform the same job responsibilities, so if a potential cop cannot swim like any other cops, why would he/she get the job since they cannot perform
Fisher, but they held the the Court of Appeals did not hold the University’s admission policies to a standard of strict scrutiny so the judgement was incorrect. In previous judicial precedent in cases dealing with minority admissions, the Court has held that they are reviewable under the fourteenth amendment, these such cases must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny to determine whether the policies are precisely tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest. If the policy does not meet this standard, then race can not be considered in any admissions process. The Court stated the it was the job of the reviewing court to verify that the University policy in question was necessary to achieve a more diverse student body and the any race-neutral alternative would not achieve the same level of diversity. The Supreme Court said the lower courts did not conduct a sufficient strict scrutiny examination in this case.
The U.S. Supreme Court Case Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke was officially decided June 28, 1978. The case addressed the issue of use of affirmative action in university admissions processes. Affirmative action, also referred to as positive discrimination, was a result of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, and was intended to ensure equal entry to educational institutions or employment entities to certain groups that “have historically suffered invidious discrimination” (Janda et al., 477). However, sometimes this method causes discrimination of other groups, through establishment of racial quotas. University of California employed the process of affirmative action and instituted racial quotas in its admissions
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
In 2008, Abigail Fisher, a white female, applied for admission at the University of Texas at Austin. In 1997, Texas passed legislation which guaranteed all students who graduate in the top 10% of Texas’ graduating class, admission to all Texas state-funded universities, regardless of other factors. Fisher did not qualify for Texas’ “Top 10%” with a GPA of 3.59 and an SAT score of 1180, but applied for general admission in the top 12% of her class. At the University of Texas, about 75% of admissions are comprised of students who qualified as Texas’ “Top 10%”, and 25% of admissions are based on several factors including, but are not limited to, grade-point average, extracurricular activities, and race. When Fisher was denied admission, she enrolled
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,
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
Grutter V. Bollinger Research Paper 2 Abstract Barbara Grutter (plaintiff) which is a resident of Michigan who was denied admissions into the University of Michigan Law School. Lee Bollinger (defendant) was president of the University of Michigan. Grutter filed this suit because the University had discriminated against the basis of race. Supreme Court ruled that the use of affirmative action in school admissions is constitutional if it treats race as some factor.
In 1949, an African American man named George McLaurin was admitted in the University of Oklahoma to its doctoral program. However, he was required to sit separately from rest of the students in the class, eat at a different time and table from white students. All of these unusual actions had some adverse effects on his academic pursuits. McLaurin appointed Thurgood Marshall to advocate this case this case which went to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Civil Rights Act led to Affirmative actions in which it ensured that victims of past discrimination would have an advantage in finding jobs, job promotions, and special consideration for admission to college and universities (Mullane, 1993, p. 237). However,
This subsequently led to a change in affirmative action measure to include
SUMMARY In this landmark case Allan Bakke, a white applicant to the University of California, Davis Medical School, sued claiming his denial of admission on racial grounds was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The standing rule at the time was that race may be a factor in determining admission to educational institutions; however it cannot be the sole determining factor. FACTS OF THE CASE The University of California, Davis Medical School had been reserving 16 spots in each class out of 100 for disadvantaged minorities.
Ira Katznelson is the author of When Affirmative Action Was White, a historical analysis of the history of affirmative action and racial inequality in the United States of America. Katznelson takes a definitive approach to the history of legislation and inequalities and prepares the reader initially with his title. Katznelson’s argumentative position and approach to the title of his book makes the reader question about affirmative action for white Americans, but in reality what Katznelson means by his title, When Affirmative Action Was White, is more based on the social programs and federal grant opportunities that were created and provided to Americans during the Roosevelt and Truman administration. Katznelson argument encompasses historical
The fear is that without this policy, diversity will not always happen if left up to chance. It is true that schools and other organizations have discriminated against women and people of other race. This problem created an unfair advantage for males of the superior race. Supporters also charge that without affirmative action African Americans would have a more difficult process of being admitted into prestigious and predominately white universities (Hopkins, 2010). Affirmative Action allows minorities to reflect different areas of study and work that otherwise would have never been considered.
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