Affirmative Action

The fact that, in most cases, a minority student will get accepted over a white student with the same or almost the same qualifications is causing controversy all over the nation. This is precisely the definition of affirmative action. In an excerpt titled Affirmative Action and the College Admissions Process from the book, 8 Steps to Help Black Families Pay For College, by Thomas and Will LaVeist, it is stated that, “affirmative action is meant to level the playing field and ensure that schools and businesses are not intentionally discriminating against minority groups.” This leveling of the playing field leads to the very broad generalization and misperception that the policy is allowing less-qualified minorities to take the place of the more-qualified whites.

Affirmative action in college admissions continues to be heatedly debated. In 2003, the Supreme Court had ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that diversity was a compelling interest for colleges to use race in admissions. In the amicus brief that the American Sociological Association et al. provided to the Supreme Court, sociological evidence was presented to elucidate the value of affirmative action. Yet in 2006, Proposal 2 was passed in Michigan to ban affirmative action in public education (Levitsky). Based on the information in the amicus brief, the correlation between race and socioeconomic status of the minorities, and the negative effects of banning affirmative action, admissions officers at the University of Michigan should consider

Generations of families have suffered due unequal laws or prejudices set in place to prevent minorities from growing. Slavery, segregation, separate but equal laws, the trail of tears, failing ESOL classes, unequal pay and so much more effect today's youth and causing history to change slowly if at all. Affirmative action has good intentions and is very much needed in today's world however it sometimes fails doing what it was created to do.

Affirmative action has been around for decades. Some believe it isn’t fair but others do. Those who believe and agree with affirmative action tend to say, “The principle of affirmative action is to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people” (Bidmead, Andrew pg 3). Others that disagree with it and find it unfair simply see it as another form of discrimination, giving one group extra advantages based upon nothing but their skin color (Cline, Austin pg 1). I believe that affirmative action is indeed fair because it gives minorities a better chance at having a successful career in their near future.

Affirmative Action is an employment legislation protection system that is intended to address the systemized discrimination faced by women and minorities. It achieves this by enforcing diversity through operational intrusions into recruitment, selection, and other personnel functions and practices in America. Originally, Affirmative Action arose because of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s desire to integrate society on educational, employment, and economic levels, yet it was John F. Kennedy who issued Executive Order 10925 to create the Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, a commission that evolved into our modern Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Affirmative action is an action taken by an organization to select on the basis of race, gender, or ethnicity by giving due preferences to minorities like women and races being not adequately represented under the existing employment. To make the presentation of all these compositions almost equal in proportion to do away the injustice done in the past. The Supreme Company need to design an affirmative action program in the light of recent Supreme Court judgment passed in favor of affirmative actions to be adopted by various companies.

As affirmative action has become a simplistic strategy to decrease racial bigotry, it has developed into undermining the minority while producing favoritism. Additionally, the flawed policy has created preference within career fields and an academic mismatch among races. To eliminate this outdated system, financial-based affirmative action would serve as a revolutionary law that would help those suffering in poverty without highlighting the color of an individual 's skin.

He states, “[…] let’s admit that talents and interests aren’t proportionately distributed in a fair society and that it’s time to drop colleges’ racial quotas and preferences” (¶ 16). Essentially, he contends that excellence should be celebrated wherever it is found and that affirmative action policies undermine colleges’ ability to search for it. Barone then goes on to defend his position with several reasons why racial quotas and preferences should be eliminated. He claims, “[w]hen a policy has been vigorously followed by venerable institutions for more than a generation without getting any closer to producing the desired results, perhaps there is some problem with the goal” (¶ 1). The primary goal of affirmative action is to afford disadvantaged minorities opportunities that otherwise would not ordinarily be extended to them; however, according to Barone, affirmative action is a failed government program that is unsuccessfully failing at what it was originally intended to ensure. He further supports this reason by referencing a New York Times article titled “Even With Affirmative Action, Blacks and Hispanics Are More Underrepresented at Top Colleges Than 35 Years Ago,” which consisted of enrollment data of various colleges and universities. He states, “[i]n 2015 – as in 1980, when these statistics were first gathered – blacks and

The utilization of race in affirmative action policies in higher education has been a topic of contention for several decades now. Since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we have seen some of the most heated debates over the fairness of affirmative action and the impacts on society the utilization of race creates. With such pending questions on fairness and of the constitutionality of affirmative action policies two major Supreme Court cases have arisen, University of California Regents v. Bakke and Grutter v. Bollinger, both impacting university admissions policies throughout the country and setting precedent in following rulings. Following the two rulings of these cases, I argue that affirmative action and the utilization of

The equal opportunity that affirmative action provides has also increased the amount of minority applicants applying to each school. It has “resulted in doubling or tripling the number of minority applications to colleges or universities, and have made colleges and universities more representative of their surrounding community” (Messerli). Since the playing field has been evened, it has encouraged more of those who are disadvantaged because of their ethnicity to apply for and get admitted into college. However, the quotas cause schools to admit under qualified students of minor races who don’t meet the limit over highly qualified students who’s race has reached the limit.

Today affirmative action and other racial injustices tend to be in the spotlight quite often, such as in “Fisher v University of Texas at Austin” case which highlighted that many highly qualified white prospective students are passed over for less qualified minority students to attempt to make the university more diverse using the affirmative action initiative (“Voices: Affirmative Action”). Affirmative action or positive discrimination is a policy in which those who have been discriminated on in the past or who tend to be discriminated on presently are favored, usually in relation to education or jobs. It was introduced by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 to attempt to reduce the discrimination still continuing despite the civil rights movements. Later it was further developed and enforced by President Lyndon B. Johnson. A professor of English at San Jose University, Shelby Steele, an African American man, spoke of his views of the negative impacts of affirmative action in his book, “The Content of Our Character: A New Vision of Race in America.” In Steele’s book he discredits

According to the Washington Post, UC has admitted more Latino applicants than non-Hispanic whites to its freshman class this year. The Washington Post also states that forty percent of its students are the first in their generation to attend college and four out of ten students come from poor families. The ban on affirmative action seems to be working seamlessly here; however, it is not. This year, UC has admitted 22,000 Asian American, 17,000 Hispanic/Latino, 16,000 non-Hispanic whites, and 2,500 African Americans according to the Washington Post. The diversity on campus is extremely low. There are only 2,500 African American and 22,000 Asian Americans. Because affirmative action increases diversity on campus, many colleges and universities do not want to abolish such a program. Therefore, they are looking for other ways to maintain diversity without violating the constitution.

Discrimination and segregation have been inbred into America’s history from day one. Therefore, there have been many laws and bills passed to break down barriers between privileged whites and unfortunate minorities. Among these government actions are the 14th Amendment, Equal Pay Act, and the Civil Rights Acts. John F. Kennedy perhaps created one of the most heavily debated policies today, his Affirmative Action Policy. Affirmative action is defined as, “the practice of improving the educational and job opportunities of members of groups that have not been treated fairly in the past because of their race, sex, etc.” (“Definition of AFFIRMATIVE” 1). The definition itself is vague and open for a good deal of interpretation which causes much of today’s debates. The most recent interpretation of Affirmative Action came from the Fisher vs. University of Texas at Austin (UT of Austin). Fisher was a white individual who was denied acceptance into the university, and then filed a lawsuit against them. Fisher lost the case at the Supreme Court level in 2013, but the case returned in 2016 again with a much closer vote, so affirmative action is losing some of its power and will continue to be challenged for years to come, but is it worth the challenge (Kut.org 1)? Affirmative Action has served a vital role in the integration of race into universities and the workforce, but now it is outdated and an unnecessary requirement for schools and businesses.

Affirmative action was put in place to give minority groups like African Americans, Latinos, and women, who were historically discriminated against in the past, special access to jobs and education. And I can understand the purpose of this several years ago; there were very little to no opportunities for these groups. Affirmative action provided programs to these groups that weren’t available otherwise. But in the 21st century, things are very different. Although racism is still an issue in our country, it’s nothing like it used to be. And there are far more opportunities

On March 6, 1961, President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, introducing the phrase “affirmative action.” A few years later, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order 11246, which prohibited discrimination based on race, color and religion. Although there were no specific policies that require colleges and universities to use affirmative action programs, they voluntarily gave advantages to minorities and women in the admission process. Affirmative action programs were first challenged in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), in which the Supreme Court ruled that racial quotas are unconstitutional and violated the 14th Amendment. However, schools could still use race as a factor in the admission process as long as it is not the only factor. As a result, colleges have adjusted their affirmative action programs to fit the guidelines outlined by the Court. Today, affirmative action is still a highly controversial issue. In modern day America, the majority of Americans support affirmative action, but there are still those who do not. Affirmative action benefits minorities by moving jobs towards minorities, but the shift is relatively small. Affirmative action also provides minorities with higher acceptance rates to colleges and universities. On the other hand, opponents of affirmative action often cite mismatch theory as one of their main reasons of opposition, but minorities who attend high tier colleges actually benefit from the the