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 Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), once known as the Lucretia Mott Amendment, was supposed to guarantee equal rights between men and women (The Learning Network). The ERA covered many issues that women faced during its time. Abortion rights were included so that women could choose whether or not they would have a child. The ERA included women in the military drafts as one of their topics to make sure that men and women both had the same obligations. When the Constitution was first being formed, it was stated that “All men are created equal”, but they forgot one vital piece of America —women (“Equal Rights Amendment”).
Part III applies the Court’s precedent to the University’s affirmative action policy and concludes that the policy violates the Equal Protection Clause. Part IV examines the impact of Fisher II on existing affirmative action policies and concludes that the Court’s holding will be narrowly crafted and thus negligibly impact other policies. In addition, Part IV asserts that the Court’s affirmative action jurisprudence should be fundamentally altered because it fails to adequately guide lower courts, legislatures, and litigants concerning the permissible scope of affirmative action policies. As discussed in Part IV, a more effective—and honest—approach would be to acknowledge that: (1) diversity is an essential part of ensuring inclusion in higher education and the workplace; (2) remedying past discrimination is a compelling state interest; and (3) in limited circumstances race may be a dispositive factor in the admissions or hiring process. The Court’s current framework, although well-intentioned, ignores these realities and tries to quantify the role of race in admissions – a task that is impossible and
The evidence Lee provides is essentially accurate because she herself is an Asian American woman. She has dealt with the “model minority” stereotype in her own life experiences so it makes her a good candidate to be researching the students at AHS. Although Lee is an educated ethnographer,it does leave room for her results to include inaccuracies. When she first arrived at the school to begin researching, she noted that “in addition to my ethnic/racial identity and social-class identity, I discovered that my gender, age, American-born status, and position as a graduate student influenced how students reacted to me” (Lee, 2009, p.20). Some of the students recognized these pieces of her identity and then accepted her into their lives.
In this memo I will be going over Higher Education Debates dealing with the fears of Asian quotas being imposed; as well as going over why there seems to be a trend of Asian-American parents who are more biased towards prestigious colleges. For the first article regarding Asian quotas, I will be summarizing and reflecting upon the six arguments whether it is believed that certain Ivy league schools impose a quota on the Asian-American population or not. As for the piece dealing with Asian American parent preferring Ivy League schools for their children, I will briefly summarize and discuss the cultural reasons why Asian-American parents are highly selective over their college choices for their children. In Ron Unz’s debate, he provides statistical evidence indicating that Ivy league schools place quotas on the Asian-American population
The civil rights area of the 1960s is over. Affirmative action policies based on racial quotas or preferences have been struck down by the Supreme Court, yet states have an interest in college admission that are diverse and reflect their general population. The University of Texas finds itself defending policies intended to conform to recent court rulings yet merely mentioning race as a factor in a holistic review has drawn a challenge. The University of Texas process of admissions aligns with Gutter V Bollinger. The facts of this case are in keeping with previous court precedents.
Thus, often without realizing it, the United States has practiced what, in effect, was white affirmative action on a highly generous and widespread basis, followed by a much more modest program of black affirmative action. By understanding this history, we can come to terms with the widening gap between blacks and whites noted by Lyndon Johnson and with the incapacity of many blacks to be able to make good this gap in the following four decades (Katznelson,
This law also ensures diversity on campus, and on top of that affirmative action is still used for the remaining students that are not at the top 10% of their class (Hung). Evidently, race plays a crucial role in the admission decisions. Hung claims that race shouldn’t play such a big role in the admission process because it is considered discrimination. He supports this argument by comparing the average GPA and SAT scores of those students that were granted admission but were not in the top 10 percent of their class. African Americans had the lowest averaged scores, followed by Hispanics, then whites, and then Asian Americans.
They believed it was important for all Asians to work hard, get good grades and keep themselves out of trouble. They also held a deep desire to earn respect from white Americans and “did not challenge discrimination or speak directly about inequality” (Lee, 2009, p. 40). By doing so the Asian-identified students kept to themselves and accepted the discrimination in hopes of getting ahead. The Asian American identified students were compiled of a range of ethnic groups and social classes. They were strong academically and believed they had the most in common with other Asian-American students, although they saw themselves as American.
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
For generations now, powerful and brave women in the United States have cajoled citizens, members of Congress and government officials to ratify a Constitutional amendment that states “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” In 1923, during the 75th anniversary of the 1848 Women’s Rights convention in Seneca Falls, women’s rights activist Alice Paul created the “Lucretia Mott Amendment” which would grant men and women equal rights throughout the United States. On March 22, 1972, the amendment now titled the “Equal Rights Amendment” passed the U.S Senate and House of Representatives and was to be sent to the states for approval. However, once the seven-year deadline on the ratification process came to an end in 1979, the amendment’s proponents lacked the ratification by 38 states and thus the proposed 27th amendment for equal rights was terminated. The ERA advocates continue to work together and utilize each other's resources in hope to finally pass the bill.
The Equal Rights Amendment The Equal Rights Amendment or the ERA, is a Constitutional Amendment written by Alice Paul stating, “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” The amendment was first introduced to congress in 1923 however the first interest of the idea of equality started in 1848 at the first Women’s Rights convention in Seneca Falls, NY. I support the Equal Rights Amendment. Although many women did not support the ERA they believed that if congress were to pass this amendment they would people would expect too much of them and include other individuals as well. There were however a majority of women who did support the ERA stating that it would help
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
