Affirmative Action

There are many supporters and opponents of Affirmative Action. The focus of Affirmative action is meant to be an attempt at equality throughout society. Every sector in America would be equal and unprejudiced. On the other hand, adopting affirmative action would force many employers to replace hard-working employees with those possibly less qualified simply due to their gender or ethnicity. Throughout history, people have been categorized into different groups. These groupings were based on certain characteristics people shared, whether it was their ethnicity, race, gender, or religion. Society is notorious for distinguishing among different groups and favoring one or two of them. Undoubtedly, this separation of peoples, led to increased tension between various groups. As time progressed, the conflicts intensified, and it became apparent that a change was necessary. So I intend to educate the reader on the origin of Affirmative Action; how it impacted the American society; is it still needed in today’s environment; what are some of the drawbacks or issues that came from implementing Affirmative Action, and finally what is the most beneficial aspect from Affirmative Action. One of the most famous quotes about Affirmative Action comes from President Lyndon Johnson who explained the rationale behind the use of affirmative action to achieve equal opportunity in a 1965 speech: “You do not take a person, who for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring

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

Affirmative Action. For many Texas high school students, these two words haunt them. Their future, or at least their future at the University of Texas, depends on these words. For Abigail Noel Fisher, a 2008 graduate from Sugar Land, Texas, affirmative action and its race bias policies allegedly ruined her chances of getting into this prestigious state university. Fisher argues that race should not be a factor in college admissions processes, Fisher argues for equality. Equality in respect to race is in our constitution; it surrounds us everyday. In theory, race should be irrelevant in this day and age. Humanity has established that one race is not superior to another, so why should race matter at all in the college admissions process? Why should the University of Texas, or any other university, have that “check your race” box on their applications? Abigail Fisher, and every other person applying to the university, deserves as much opportunity as every other student of any race. When it comes to college, intelligence and character should be key to admission- not the color of the applicant’s skin. The University of Texas’ current affirmative action policy is an unfair college admissions process that the Supreme Court should ban so that admissions are based on intellectual ability in high school, national testing scores, extracurricular activities, and community service; this should be changed so that every person,

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.

Not only does Affirmative action prevent discrimination, but also this legislation implemented by the national government can diversify and improve the overall well being of businesses and schools. Sometimes individuals of a minority group are rejected for a position or declined acceptance to a university not because they are inept, but due to outdated stereotypical assumptions that cause an employer or official to reconsider that person. The ideas behind affirmative action prevent unfair labeling from those whose

Every year, millions of students apply to colleges and universities in the United States. The status of their application, whether they get accepted to or rejected by the school of their dreams, may ultimately be determined by two words: affirmative action. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines affirmative action as an effort to correct past injustices, means to right the wrongs of the past, positive steps to correct past discrimination (Affirmative 1). However, for those exceedingly qualified members of a majority group who do not get accepted while less qualified minority members do, affirmative action begins to insinuate reverse discrimination, the unfair treatment of members of majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities (Reverse 1). Affirmative action is a topic of contention that has been disputed in the court systems for roughly four decades. It is now time that affirmative action in college admissions be abolished because it erroneously implies that diversity is more imperative than merit and unjustifiably discriminates

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.

     Affirmative action is an attempt by the United States to amend a long history of racial and sexual discrimination. But these days it seems to incite, not ease, the nations internal divisions. Opponents of affirmative action say that the battle for equal rights is over, and that requiring quotas that favor one group over another is un-American. The people that defend it say that the playing field is not level, and that providing advantages for minorities and women is fair considering the discrimination those groups tolerated for years. This paper will discuss the history of affirmative action, how it is implemented in society today, and evaluate the arguments that it presents.

A person has just obtained their dream ACT score, 34, while maintaining outstanding extracurricular activities throughout high school. After applying to the university of their choice, they are informed that they have not been admitted. Crushed and confused, they go on the university’s website only to discover that the university is looking for people with a more diverse racial background. Standing in the way of their acceptance is a defective policy formally known as race-based affirmative action. Informally called affirmative action, it is a combination of adopted policies that construct an advantage to minority groups, giving them more possibilities to succeed in jobs, education, and other aspects of daily life. The whole concept came

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

Affirmative Action is an outcome of the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement. Its purpose is to provide equal opportunities for members of minority groups and women in education and employment. It is not until 1961 did the term “affirmative action” was first used by President John F. Kennedy. He made it very clear in an Executive Order that directed government have to take “affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.” Since a lot of cooperation still tends to hire white male, by enforcing affirmative action, the number of minority groups and women in the labor force will increase.Affirmative Action helps to eliminate the imbalance in the society and reform the American system. The US Department of Labor describes affirmative action as the banning of discrimination.

When addressing legal issues of diversity in the modern day era, one main topic is brought to discussion, affirmative action. It was put into place by the federal government in the 1960’s and was initially developed to close the gap in relation to the privileged majority and the unprivileged minority in America (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). While it has been controversial since its origin, it remains controversial as critics argue it tries to equalize the impact of so many

According to Raymond A. Noe, affirmative action is an organization’s active effort to find opportunities to hire or promote people in a particular group (Fundamentals of Human Resource Management 68). There are various arguments for and against affirmative action. Some believe that it gives certain groups of people an equal opportunity to find employment where they would otherwise be kicked under the rug. Others believe that even though it creates an opportunity for minority groups, the issue of reverse discrimination comes into play where once predominantly white male jobs offerings go to women and minority groups instead. The topic of affirmative action remains very controversial and

Affirmative Action was originally established by former President John F. Kennedy on March 6, 1961 in his executive order, which included a provision that mandated federally funded projects to take “affirmative action” to ensure that hiring and employment were free of racial bias (#4). Over the years, colleges and universities began to adopt similar policies in their admissions process (#2). The purpose of affirmative action is to provide an equal ground for women and people of color in the workforce and educational institutions (#4). There are many debates and myths about affirmative action, some of which will be unraveled later in this paper. This policy does not mean it benefits unqualified minorities, but rather highlights qualified and over-qualified minorities to be considered by otherwise predominantly white institutions (#4). Affirmative action is supposed to aid the nation in establishing equal opportunity for all. In my opinion, affirmative action has a moral and just purpose and I will be using Martin Luther King Jr., Mill, and Foucault to support my argument.

All across America, universities have been denying highly qualified applicants to accept minorities who are usually less qualified. These admissions processes misuse the basic principle of affirmative action. Affirmative action is a mandate that says that minorities should be given special opportunities. In 1952, when President D.W. Eisenhower was in office, he decided to let the states decide whether or not to use affirmative action (Affirmative Action). Eleven years later, when John F. Kennedy was president, he made it mandatory for all government funded organizations to enforce affirmative action. In theory Kennedy’s mandate also applies to all public universities even though it was not directly stated. A study taken in 2009 by Princeton sociologists shows that of the students with a 3.2-3.39 GPA applied to medical school, “Asian Americans had an acceptance rate of 7.7%, while African Americans had a 67.3% acceptance rate” (Espenshade, Radford). While this supports minorities, 1st and 2nd generation Asian Americans are often left with the worst disadvantage. This clearly shows that Kennedy’s mandate is too strong to regulate the nation’s education system. The best way to enforce affirmative action is to set new guidelines that are more fair and equitable for all and to charge a large fee for universities caught infringing upon it. This will not only solve the discrimination in the admissions process, but also