Essay about Institutional Racism

Case Summary: Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) involved a white Michigan resident named Barbara Grutter and the University of Michigan Law School. Grutter was frustrated by her rejection from the Law School, claiming that the University’s decision was due to a discriminatory admission policy which sought to enroll greater amounts of underrepresented minority students. Grutter believed that white candidates possessed a disadvantage due to this policy and she sued the university. According to Grutter, race was the “predominate factor” in selecting applicants instead of academics. She argued that the policy was unconstitutional and that it violated her 14th Amendment rights.

The first case that we will glimpse into is the case of Grutter versus Bolllinger. The case is centered around the idea of diversity in the form of race is a justifiable factor in the admission to a state law school. Barbra Grutter argued that the University of Michigan Law School was breaking the Fourteenth Amendment to the constitution as well as the Civil Rights Act. Grutter hassled with the fact the minority students with the same credentials assumed a greater chance of admittance to the law school. Furthermore, the text goes on the explain one of the statement s manufactured by the prestigious law school, “Effective participation by members of all racial ethnic groups in the civic life of our Nation is essential if the dream of one Nation, indivisible, is to be realized.” (Rosenbloom) The university was not shy in explaining their concerns in the admission process.

Even though affirmative action was not outlawed in all circumstances it is often times dealt with on a case by case basis. The case established a pragmatic means of reconciling well-intentioned quota and affirmative action programs with the Constitution's zealous protection of equality (McBride). Since the case was ruled on in 1978, other court cases have been decided on that have reaffirmed Bakke’s affirmative action requirements. In 2003, Grutter v. Bollinger ruled that the University of Michigan Law School’s system of giving race a notable but non-determinative weight in the selection process was “neutral” enough and that Michigan’s efforts to create a diverse student body was “compelling” enough to meet constitutional standards for equality (McBride). However, in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003), a similar but unrelated case, the court beat down Michigan’s Undergraduate affirmative action program for using a points system to judge applicants that favored minorities by handing free points to minority applicants

According to the oxford dictionary, institutional racism is defined as discrimination amongst people of a certain race that society becomes to see as normal. Looking back at the “discovering” of America, the history of colonization, slavery, the trail of tears and even Japanese internment camps, anyone not of European(British descent) were always seen and treated as less than. Because so many years have passed, one would think that something as simple as a skin color no longer was such a big determinant of prison time, obtaining a house, getting an education, and even getting a college degree (Irizarry and Raible, 2014).

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 implementation of race-based affirmative action policies for college admission has been a controversial issue that has made its way into Supreme Court cases. Some argue that it is to counter racial inequality that minorities have suffered from while others believe affirmative action enforces reverse racism. The unconstitutionality of affirmative action has gone through the justice system and been addressed by the Supreme Court multiple times in cases such as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke [1978] and Gratz v. Bollinger [2003]. Changes must be made to ensure all student applicants are treated fairly in the college admissions process. Racial quota systems in state supported universities violate both the Civil Rights Act

The cases of Gratz/Grutter v. Bollinger are two cases alleging that the University of Michigan and the University of Michigan Law School discriminated against students who applied for admission because of their race(Tuttle, Kevin).The university of michigan receives a high volume of applicants each year(Tuttle, Kevin).to help the admissions decisions the university has a point system which is out of 100 points(O’Connor).a student that is from an underrepresented group automatically receives 20 points towards their overall score (O’Connor).the issue is Whether the School’s admission policy to automatically grant 20 out of 100 points to students of a minority ethnicity is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution(Boddie, Elise c.).The Bush administration had supported the plaintiffs in both cases, and critics regarded the verdicts as a defeat for its conservative agenda(Boddie, Elise c.).both of these cases are unique and different in there own way(Boddie, Elise c.).

The lifelong dream of a virtuous student, acceptance into a prestigious college of choice, crushed by the prejudice of a single law. Hopes upon hopes of attaining one’s dream job, demolished due to the same impassive law. Affirmative action, a national dilemma, continues to crush the dreams of many across the country; although meant with noble intentions, affirmative action offers an ineffective, impractical, and useless rectification to correct a historical social evil, the growing imbalance of different ethnicities. Instead of augmenting this common problem, affirmative action plays a critical role in reverse discrimination, equating race to diversity in opinion, and destroying the idea of meritocracy.

Racial inequality is something I have firsthand experience of and although I have never experienced institutional racism first hand, I know all too well the effects they have on a society. Institutional racism is the act of discrimination in areas such as work, education, and housing. Institutional racism is also apparent in the criminal justice system. Institutional racism largely effects the African American and Hispanic demographics. I look at institutional racism as policies put in place to keep a certain group at an extreme disadvantage in life.

Many people believe that racism in America is an issue of the past. Slavery has been abolished, segregation is no longer prevalent, and the last president of the United States was African American. While these facts prove that the U.S. has come a long way since the development of Jim Crow Laws and the ⅗ Compromise, racism has still not been defeated. In the past, America’s political system made it possible for racism and slavery to thrive. Today, America does not allow for segregation or discrimination, politically speaking. Socially speaking, however, racism can be found everywhere. While it is evident that drastic change has occurred in the American society over the last century, based on recent events and trends, as well as those of

As it relates to the education system, cultural differences are a main factor for the disparities among the races. Despite this, the Affirmative Action quota system was implemented in order to promote diversity in places of higher education. Policy makers in this country have gone out of their way to ensure that their illusion of an equal playing field exists. However, in the court case Gratz v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court ruled that the University of Michigan's application was riddled with racial discrimination against non-minorities. Pew Researchers even found that of those personally affected by Affirmative Action, including minorities and non-minorities, 4% benefited while 11% were hurt by its effects. The only beneficiaries were those of the black community while Affirmative Action policies were most detrimental to white

Proponents of affirmative action believe that because, historically, many minority groups were denied jobs and mistreated, they have been unable to recover from their impoverished state and are thus, at a disadvantage. They believe that because they generally live in poorer areas, they face more struggles than their white counterparts. They believe that such struggles make it more difficult for blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities to succeed and therefore, should increase their acceptance rates into universities to try to level the playing field for the

This was a case that protected the rights to desegregate public schools and it ended legal segregation in public schools. (Brown v. Board at Fifty) Today, most schools do not discriminate against sex, race, religion, or ethnicity when admitting students. Despite this legislation being passed, racial segregation is still prevalent in many schools across America. Some of this is due to the makeup of our communities and some is by choice.

Regarding the case of affirmative action, Justice Anthony Kennedy ruled that as long as race in applications was used in an acceptable and unbiased way and prove that they are doing so, the courts cannot prevent schools from asking race in their applications. This has become a rising problem, not only at The University of Texas. In many Ivy Leagues, Asian-Americans with perfect, 2400 SAT scores and 4.0 GPAs get denied left and right purely because their quotas of Asian-American students have been met. With other colleges across America, whites have been discriminated against as schools feel they need more minority students to create a more diverse learning environment. This ruling impacts all of American students, knowing that their race could possibly impact getting into the school of their

Minorities and their supporters in the late 1960s gave birth to the implementation of what is now known as Affirmative Action (AA) at institutions of higher education. This mark in history was viewed as a great effort to integrate minorities into society through the use of preferences in college and university admissions. Lately when addressing AA people have begun to question its cause and if it truly is a positive force for change. However, AA has not always been shrouded in a veil of suspicion. In fact, questioning of whether AA fails to successfully place students in institutions where they can succeed is fairly recent. The doubting of AA comes from what is called mismatching. Mismatching questions whether preferences in school