In “Net (Race) Neutral: An Essay on How GPA + (reweighted) SAT - Race = Diversity,” Christine Goodman illustrates the opposing viewpoints in regards to the racial discriminatory efforts by the college institutions to help diversify the incoming freshman class. With this, Goodman provides statistics and opinions of experts on the matter, which includes comparison of such discriminatory acts against other institutions. To begin, she brings up an enlightening, yet controversial court case decision: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2013). This court case demonstrates significance to this topic because it counteracts a previous court case, Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), which, “upheld diversity as a compelling interest that would justify narrowly
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
Business Law Case Study Essay: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S (2014) Facts: The Green family runs and owns Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and skills chain that has over 500 stores and they have over 13,000 employees. Other facts of the case are that the Green family has been able to organize the business around the values of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company as told by Biblical principles, one of which is the belief that the utilization of contraception is wicked. Also, the facts show that under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), occupation -founded group health care plans must offer certain sorts of preventative care, for example, FDA-accepted contraceptive approaches.
Up and until this point in time, the court has generally ruled that promoting educational diversity is in fact a compelling state objective, but in today’s America, educational diversity has been established and is thriving. In this day and age, using race as a factor in college admissions is not needed. The Fourteenth amendment ensures the equal protection of the law to each and every citizen. We may not discriminate in order to promote
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.
Hunter Johnson CRN 10774 Term Paper Political Actors are not just any elected officials, but they can be any organization, group, or person that has an influence on any political issue. In the Texas affirmative action case, many political actors are involved. Edward Blum runs a group who is working on ending affirmative action. He was along side Abigail Fisher helping her though this case. Another political actor was Justice Clarence Thomas.
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.
Law Day Essay The 14th Amendment has played a large role in the history of the United States, and still affects us to this day. One major role that it has played a part of recently is, Affirmative Action in the U.S. and whether it goes against the equal protection clause from the 14th Amendment or not. The basis behind the installation of Affirmative Action was to make amends for the racial intolerance held by many towards minorities during the early-mid 1900’s. It was put into effect to help increase enrollment of African-Americans, and other ethnicities that had been profiled against, to help them get into schools that had previously segregated race or denied them access all together.
“She wanted her son to go there as well, but because of affirmative action or minority something...her son wasn’t accepted” (Rankine 13). This quote is interesting to me because it reminds of the case Grutter v. Bollinger, where a white female applicant to the University of Michigan Law School sued the school for violating her Fourteenth Amendment because they denied her admission. She lost in the end, but the ideology that minorities are more easily accepted into schools than whites is still thought and said by some white Americans today. The importance this quote serves to the poem is that the quote is another example of a microaggression that the author wants the reader to understand happens. “She says she grabbed the stranger’s arm and
Introduction The case of Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, and centers on the University of North Carolina's use of race in its admissions policies. The petitioner, Students for Fair Admissions, have brought claims alleging that the university's use of race discriminates against Asian American applicants in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and federal civil rights statutes, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The legal issues before the Supreme Court include whether the university's use of race in admissions decisions is constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, whether the university has a compelling interest
In 1945, the High Court of Australia heard the case of Gratwick v Johnson and ultimately decided to dismiss the appeal in a unanimous decision by the Judges. While different reasoning was employed, all five judges drew the conclusion that the appeal should be dismissed as the statute the defendant was charged under was inconsistent with s.92 of the Australian Constitution. To provide some context for this case in 1944, Dulcie Johnson was charged with an offence against the National Security Act 1939-1943 in that she did contravene par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order by travelling from South Australia to Western Australia by rail. In brief terms par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order provided that no person shall, without a valid permit, travel from state to state or territory.
The role of affirmative action in college admissions has been debated between critics who argue that it provides a fair access to higher education for minorities and critics who argue that it promotes discrimination against white students instead. Despite the numerous amount of court cases that have challenged race-based factors in college admissions, the Supreme Court’s final rulings have always supported affirmative action in education. However, the recent cases of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin has proposed the Supreme Court to review the possibility of abolishing affirmative action. Thus, this case’s impact on the Supreme Court’ new stance on racial-based admissions has garnered the attention of numerous news outlets that media
Why We Shouldn’t Use Racial Quotas in College Admissions In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in the Regents of University of California vs. Bakke case, that the use of racial preferences in college admissions violates the Equal Protections Clause of the fourteenth amendment. The Equal Protections Clause says that no state shall deny a person equal protection within jurisdiction. Since then, a great deal of Affirmative Action cases against colleges have transpired. There is much dispute among colleges and potential students on the issue.
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
