The issue of racism continued to thrive well into the 1960s, where numerous underrepresented groups were denied privileges that the citizens of today take for granted, notably in education. These groups were often turned down or not considered when applying for colleges based on the color of their skin. Consequently, everything changed in 1961 when former president J.F.K issued an executive order to prevent this type discrimination in the workplace as well as in education. Fast forward to today, countless of these issues have been resolved, as well as laws except for one. Affirmative Action continues to be the defining factor for college applicants. For many individuals, this may seem like an advantage, but for others, this is just another form of discrimination. Affirmative Action should not be a deciding factor on whether or not a student gets accepted to ensure that everyone gets an equal opportunity.
Several of the students who take advantage of Affirmative Action often don't meet the requirements needed to be accepted into an institution. This allows the students who were admitted to receive a “heads up” just by means of being unrepresented. Gerald Walpin was quoted stating,”... minority members who obtained admission to colleges with racial preference programs received
…show more content…
Gerald Walpin even says that “ The 14th Amendment guarantees to “any person,” not just minorities,”the equal protection of the laws.” The premise of Affirmative Action was to allow these groups the equal opportunity as any Caucasian had to be accepted into a college of choice or work; however, this manner took place during a time where segregation was still acceptable to many. Times have changed along with many laws, to allow the equal opportunity for every American, to let their heart run free without any
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.
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
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 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 the article “The Case for Historically Black Colleges and Universities: Understanding Race Relation in the United States Through its HBCUs” written by Priscelle Biehlmann, she uses data to argue that there are more advantages for both black and non-black students when attending a HBCU rather than a Predominately White Institution (PWI). First she discusses the how HBCUs emerged during the Reconstruction Period. Then she highlights the how court cases such as the 1898 Plessy v. Ferguson and 1954 Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court had an effect on HBCUs. She then transitions by providing distinct advantages Black and non-Black students undergo when attending a HBCU. Biehlmann starts the article discussing the emergence of HBCUs.
Historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) are institutions of higher education in the United States founded primarily for the education of African Americans. Prior to the mid-1960s, HBCUs were virtually the only institutions open to African Americans due to the vast majority of predominantly white institutions prohibiting qualified African Americans from acceptance during the time of segregation. As such, they are institutional products of an era of discrimination and socially constructed racism against African Americans (Joseph, 2013). Successfully, millions of students have been educated in spite of limited resources, public contempt, accreditation violations, and legislative issues. The purpose of this research paper is to discuss
Is affirmative action still necessary for guaranteeing equal access to educational opportunities at elite universities and graduate schools? Should admissions decisions be based solely on academic criteria and merit? Key Words: affirmative action, Grutter V. Bollinger, and diversity. Grutter V. Bollinger Research Paper 3 Affirmative Action in Education Affirmative action was formed more than fifty years ago.
The main purpose of Affirmative Action is to put an end to discrimination towards the minorities. Although black citizens were put towards a disadvantage in society with the assistance of Affirmative Action was reversed back towards white citizens. When racials practice that have historically have placed blacks at a disadvantage are removed that is when whites believe that preferential treatment is given back to the blacks. Hill also argues that there needs to be some changes in the labor
A historic case in the U.S. supreme court was called the Brown vs. the Board of Education. Getting a good education is essential and we can see diverse population of students from different nationality in the classroom. However, this wasn’t always the case in the United States. Up until 1954, classrooms were very different than they are today—not allowing African American students to attend schools with white students. This was allowed because of the previous court case of 1896 of Plessy vs. Ferguson.
Although the roots of this movement date as far back as the 1900s, the legacy of the African American’s role in World War II sparked the catalyst needed to promote the legislation that eventually led to their equality. “On May 17, 1954, The Supreme Court announced its decision in the case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka” (Brinkley 772). This regulation overturned the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in the Plessy V Ferguson case. The separate but equal doctrine was a prime example of domestic policy that did not uphold the government’s constitutional promise to promote the general welfare of society-to include all that fall under the definition of an American citizen. The affliction put on children who had to travel to segregated public schools placed an unequal burden and damage done to those who it pertained to.
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.
However, there’s a certain perversion to admission policies like this, policies like UT’s “top 10” program. These policies leverage their racial diversity via neighborhood, and thus public high school, segregation. As Jamelle Bouie write in a Slate article on the
As far as morality and justice are concerned, if a school or business or government declines to practice affirmative action, that’s okay” – says the
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