The next challenge to Affirmative Action programs in higher education sets the precedent for future cases moving forward to the 21st century. The Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1974) involved a white Anglo male, Allan Bakke, and the University of California, Davis Medical School (UCDMS). The plaintiff, already obtained a Master’s degree in mechanical engineering, was denied admission to UCDMS. Bakke claimed that the university’s special admission minority program had reduced the number of places for which he could compete (Moreno, 2003, p. 17). During this time, many higher education institutions began using quota systems as a means to increase the number of students of color in their campus (Smallwood, 2015, p. 2). According …show more content…
17). It was then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1978, which reached a judgment despite the justices being divided on the issue. The final vote from Justice William Powell decidedly ruled in favor of the plaintiff and it was determined that remediating discrimination was not sufficient justification for considering race in admission (Reed, 2013, p. 342). According to O’Neill (1987), Justice Powell condoned race-consciousness, but he was also adamantly against universities using rigid numerical formulas to benefit diversity (as cited in Moreno, 2003, p. 17). Justice Powell used Harvard University as a positive example of how diversity consciousness could be applied to the admissions process without having to rely on fixed numbers. Kolling (1998) explained that Harvard’s admissions policy is such that race or ethnic background is considered a plus factor, so long as it did not exempt the applicant from being compared with other candidates for admission (as cited in Moreno, 2003, p. 17). Race and ethnic background only served as an advantage, not as criteria to secure a spot. Because the justices were split on this issue, the case and its ruling would pose difficulties for institutions to find constitutional admissions criteria, but will later prove to be the context by which cases concerning race-based programs are evaluated (Smallwood, 2015, p.
In 1973 a thirty-three year-old Caucasian male named Allan Bakke applied to and was denied admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis. In 1974 he filed another application and was once again rejected, even though his test scores were considerably higher than various minorities that were admitted under a special program. This special program specified that 16 out of 100 possible spaces for the students in the medical program were set aside solely for minorities, while the other 84 slots were for anyone who qualified, including minorities. What happened to Bakke is known as reverse discrimination. Bakke felt his rejections to be violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment, so he took the University of California Regents to the Superior Court of California. It was ruled that "the admissions program violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment"1 The clause reads as follows:"...No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor without due process of the law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."2 The court ruled that race could not be a factor in admissions. However, they did not force the admittance of Bakke because the court could not know if he would have been admitted if the special admissions program for minorities did not exist.
In 2008 Abigail Fisher was denied admission to the University of Texas her argument was that her right to equal protection was violated because the university is using race for their admissions and she is white. Fisher challenged the university’s consideration of race in the undergraduate admissions process. Before Abigail Fisher there was another case that was presented in 1996 similar to that of Fishers the Hopwood v. Texas that also argued race-conscious admissions because of the unfair advantage that minorities were given the unfair advantage. After this case was made the Texas Legislature passed a law agreeing that the top 10 percent of their high school
Affirmative action, the act of giving preference to an individual for hiring or academic admission based on the race and/or gender of the individual has remained a controversial issue since its inception decades ago. Realizing its past mistake of discriminating against African Americans, women, and other minority groups; the state has legalized and demanded institutions to practice what many has now consider as reverse discrimination. “Victims” of reverse discrimination in college admissions have commonly complained that they were unfairly rejected admission due to their race. They claimed that because colleges wanted to promote diversity, the colleges will often prefer to accept applicants of another race who had significantly lower test scores and merit than the “victims”. In “Discrimination and Disidentification: The Fair-Start Defense of Affirmative Action”, Kenneth Himma responded to these criticisms by proposing to limit affirmative action to actions that negate unfair competitive advantages of white males established by institutions (Himma 277 L. Col.). Himma’s views were quickly challenged by his peers as Lisa Newton stated in “A Fair Defense of a False Start: A Reply to Kenneth Himma” that among other rationales, the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action (Newton 146 L. Col.). This paper will also argue that the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action because it cannot be fairly applied in the United States of America today. However, affirmative action should still be allowed and reserved for individuals whom the state unfairly discriminates today.
The issue of Affirmative Action, preferences towards persons of racial minorities to compensate for prior discrimination, in college admissions is a quite complicated one. Many sides must be explored to gain a better understanding of the theories and views on this issue. It is not easily answered with a yes or no. Since its inception, Affirmative Action’s use has been a major debate in American society. Many questions are left to be investigated. Many believe that we should live in a society where preferential treatment could be eliminated, and admission to college is based solely on one’s merit and character, yet this view seems quite unrealistic.
Last summer, the Supreme Court ruled against the use of race in the college admissions process in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas. Since then, affirmative action has become a big issue in the media; however, many people still do not even know what affirmative action is. Affirmative action is a policy to prevent discrimination on the basis of “color, religion, sex, or national origin.” Overall, it favors minorities that are often discriminated. It might sound like an excellent policy; however, the use of this policy in the college admissions process is prejudice. In the college admissions process, affirmative action lowers the standards for some races, while raising the standard for other races. For example, an Asian might need a SAT score of 2300 to be considered for admission at a top school such as Yale and a white applicant might need a score of 2100, while an African American or Hispanic only needs a score of 1700. While affirmative action provides equality in the workplace, it has no place in the college admissions process and should, therefore, be abolished and replaced. This type of policy can be repealed completely, replaced with a college admissions process that favors first generation college applicants, or replaced with a policy based on an applicant’s socioeconomic status.
Charles, Camille Z., et al. "Affirmative-Action Programs for Minority Students: Right in Theory, Wrong in Practice." The Chronicle of Higher Education 55.29 (2009). Academic OneFile. Web. 9 Aug. 2011.
California's decision in 1996 to outlaw the use of race in public college admissions was widely viewed as the beginning of the end for affirmative action at public universities all over the United States. But in the four years since Californians passed Proposition 209, most states have agreed that killing affirmative action outright would deepen social inequality by denying minority citizens access to higher education. The half-dozen states that are actually thinking about abandoning race-sensitive
Reed, Rodney J. (1983) Affirmative Action in Higher Education: Is It Necessary? The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 52, No. 3, Persistent and Emergent Legal Issues in Education: 1983 Yearbook, 332-349.
Affirmative action has improved the overall life of numerous people. Many minorities, specifically African-Americans, have improved due to educational opportunities acquired via affirmative action. Enrollment of black students skyrocketed because of affirmative action. Blacks had accounted for less than one percent of students entering into universities in 1951. Affirmative action, starting in the 1960’s allowed for blacks to make up 6.3% of Ivy Leagues by 1978, and approximately eight percent of law and medical schools by 1995. The same schools that were less than one percent black in 1951 now had a population consisting of 7.1% black students in 1989. A study d...
Clegg, expanding on the expense of discrimination towards scholars, displays how discrimination has a single benefit: diversity. Likewise, Abigail Fisher, plaintiff in the recent case Fisher v. University of Texas, has better grades than the average needed to gain admission for African-American and Hispanic students, yet was rejected from the University of Texas. Fisher, who is white, was forced to attend the l...
Known as one of the biggest obstacles in higher education to date would arguably be the use of affirmative action within the higher education admission process for both private and public institutions (Kaplin & Lee, 2014; Wang & Shulruf, 2012). The focus of current research is an attempt to either justify or deny the use of affirmative action within current practices through various higher education institutions, and though any one person could potentially be swayed to side with the rationale to maintain its use or disregard, the facts are quite clear that the future of this practice is unclear. Therefore, this essay will present current research in an attempt to determine if affirmative action should continue to be used within college admission decisions.
Discrimination is still a chronic global issue, and drastic inequalities still exist at the present time. Thus, the Affirmative Action Law is an important tool to many minorities most especially to women, and people of color, for the reason that this program provides an equality on educational, and professional opportunities for every qualified individual living in the United States. Without this program, a higher education would have been impossible for a “minority students” to attain. Additionally, without the Affirmative Action, a fair opportunity to have a higher-level career...
Affirmative action policies were created to help level the playing field in American society. Supporters claim that these plans eliminate economic and social disparities to minorities, yet in doing so, they’ve only created more inequalities. Whites and Asians in poverty receive little to none of the opportunities provided to minorities of the same economic background (Messerli). The burden of equity has been placed upon those who were not fortunate enough to meet a certain school’s idea of “diversity” (Andre, Velasquez, and Mazur). The sole reason for a college’s selectivity is to determine whether or not a student has the credentials to attend that school....
Today there is considerable disagreement in the country over Affirmative Action with the American people. MSNBC reported a record low in support for Affirmative Action with 45% in support and 45% opposing (Muller, 2013). The affirmative action programs have afforded all genders and races, exempting white males, a sense of optimism and an avenue to get the opportunities they normally would not be eligible for. This advantage includes admission in colleges or hiring preferences with public and private jobs; although Affirmative Action has never required quotas the government has initiated a benefits program for the schools and companies that elect to be diversified. The advantages that are received by the minorities’ only take into account skin color, gender, disability, etc., are what is recognized as discriminatory factors. What is viewed as racism to the majority is that there ar...
Affirmative action has been a controversial topic ever since it was established in the 1960s to right past wrongs against minority groups, such as African Americans, Hispanics, and women. The goal of affirmative action is to integrate minorities into public institutions, like universities, who have historically been discriminated against in such environments. Proponents claim that it is necessary in order to give minorities representation in these institutions, while opponents say that it is reverse discrimination. Newsweek has a story on this same debate which has hit the nation spotlight once more with a case being brought against the University of Michigan by some white students who claimed that the University’s admissions policies accepted minority students over them, even though they had better grades than the minority students. William Symonds of Business Week, however, thinks that it does not really matter. He claims that minority status is more or less irrelevant in college admissions and that class is the determining factor.