The Probem of Reverse Discrimination Essay

In Jackson v. Birmingham Board Of Education, Coach Jackson filed a lawsuit claiming the school’s athletic program was discriminating against the team based on their sex and was being retaliated against, which falls in violation of Title IX (Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 2005). After finding out funding and access to equipment were not equal, a girls’ basketball coach spoke with supervisors. The complaint was unsuccessful and he received poor work evaluations as a result and was eventually removed from the coaching position. The lawsuit was dismissed on the premise that Title IX does not include claims of retaliation. This has created confusion with court cases in regards to what constitutes as retaliation in making an accusation of discrimination. Since the development of Title IX, another civil action that has been created to protect citizens from having their rights violated is Section 1983 (42 USC 1983). Section 1983 covers claims in conjunction with Title IX. Section 1983 enforces Constitutional rights and reiterates the prohibition of discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex and religion (42 USC

There are lots of potential effects related to discrimination. It includes things like disempowerment, low self-esteem and self-identity and also marginalisation. I am now going to explain these effects and connect them with a case study.

Across the nation, millions of Americans of all races turn on the television or open a newspaper and are bombarded with images of well dressed, articulate, attractive black people advertising different products and representing respected companies. The population of black professionals in all arenas of work has risen to the point where seeing a black physician, attorney, or a college professor are becoming more a common sight. More and more black people are holding positions of respect and authority throughout America today, such as Barack Obama, Colin Powell, Condelezza Rice and many other prominent black executives. As a result of their apparent success, these black people are seen as role models for many Americans, despite their race.

some like this, is the result of racism. In this body of work, the Supreme Court Case surrounding

Discrimination and prejudice can impact any group or individuals well-being. Jewish Americans are no exception. They face judgments, threats, isolation and stereotypical opinions of others daily. Many Jewish individuals are hesitant to seek counseling because they fear the non-Jewish counselor may not be empathic to their specific issues or be able to discern their problems (Sue & Sue, 2016). Additionally, they have strong religious beliefs and worry counselors may make suggestions that go against these beliefs. It would be helpful if the counselor became knowledgeable about the Jewish culture and religion. Therefore, Sue & Sue (2016) suggest conferring with a rabbi as to how best to counsel those from the Jewish community. Counselors need

The case study, Is this a case of discrimination or non-performance, the author discuss the issue between Dr. George Annan, newly hired the assistant professor and Dr. Mary Reed, the department head for the Applied technology and management at Northern Plain University. Dr. Mary Reed was offered a position as the department head in August 2003. She accepted the new position and was excited to run the department. Within two years, she had a great experience working as a head of the department; however, her job got difficult when she encounters issues with African employee. Dr. George Annan was hired in August 2003 as the assistant professor in the Construction Management Program. He was the only African male professor among three White professors. Issues arise when Dr. Mary Reed observes Professor Annan’s teaching styles and other demands which seem to be problematic. However, Dr. Reed did not provide enough information to the professor Annan which makes him think that he is being discriminated. This is a case of non- performance; however, the manager took some poor steps which lead to the issues.

The case, Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority, explores the issue of suspected racial discrimination associated with disparate treatment and disparate impact caused by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) against a qualified, experienced boilermaker and foreman that is African American. Questions for the court to evaluate regarding this case include: Is this a case of disparate treatment and/or impact and was the plaintiff, David Dunlap, subject to racial discrimination? Finally, did the TVA use personal hiring practices that allowed for racial bias in the interviewing process?

The case here at hand was argued October 5th of 1964. The issue was one that dealt with Ollie’s Barbecue and its owner Ollie McClung in Alabama and the refusal of black patrons coming inside to dine-in. Ollie’s only allowed take out to black customers, even though the majority of employees were black. With the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that was handed down in July, Congress along with Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach were arguing that a clear violation of Title II of the Act was being committed by McClung. This case was close in distinction and timing of the Heart of Atlanta Motel case brought before the Supreme Court, as they were argued at the same time. “Section 201 (a) of Title II commands that all persons shall be entitled to

Background: The University of California used racial quotas to reserve 16/100 seats for "Blacks, Chicanos, Asians, and American Indians." Bakke's scores were much higher than any members of these racial groups who were recently admitted. Bakke's application was rejected twice, so he sued the University. He argued that the University's policy violated the Constitution, under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection clause.

In Ricci v. DeStefano there were a group of firefighters who took a written exam for promotion in the New Haven, CT fire department. When the results were tallied, more white firefighters passed or did better on the exam than black firefighters, which would have led to a disproportionate number of white candidates getting promoted. As a result of this, the City of New Haven, CT Fire Department, threw the exam out and no one was promoted. This went to the Supreme Court and they found that by discarding the exams, the City of New Haven violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (website).

Plessy V. John H. Ferguson dealing with the separation of black and white residents. In 1980 the state of Louisiana passed a law called “ The Separate Car Act” which mandated separate public accommodations for black and whites on railroads. On July 7, 1982 a man named Homer Plessy purchased a railroad ticket and boarded the “whites-only” section of the railroad. Plessy was immediately told to flee the “whites-only” area and enter “black-only” area. Plessy refused and was arrested for violating the Separate Car Act. Interesting enough, Homer Plessy was 7/8th European descent and 1/8th African descent but was considered black. Plessy was then placed into trial in which his lawyers argued the state denied him his rights under the fourteenth amendment which provided equal treatment under the law. Plessy lost every court in Louisiana before appealing to the Supreme Court. In a 7-1 decision, the court decided as long as facilities are equal, their separation satisfied the fourteenth amendment “Separate But Equal”. This was a huge milestone for black citizens in the United States although they later realized it didn’t seem as nice as it did on paper. This was was later overturned by Oliver Brown, et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka, et al in the year 1965 and was mandated unconstitutional for the reason that black facilities weren’t equal compared to white

According to Toobin, the history and personality of the Supreme Court has also been affected by continual topics in recurrent cases as well as recurring constitutional themes. These continually topics are seen in previous cases that have made reappearances in other cases as they are applied to modern times and cases. As seen in the provision of the historic rulings in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education and the 1964 Reynolds v. Sims that established the rule of “one person, one vote” and equal protection played a large role in the 1996 case of Romer v. Evans that ruled that Colorado could not keep its cities from passing laws to protect homosexuals (172). Even after over three decades, the decision in Brown and Reynolds greatly influenced the outcome of Romer as it gave insight into rights to all individuals. Laws regarding blacks also continued to recur in the Court system, especially after the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the laws regarding racial classifications. At this time, the Jim Crow laws were struck down and the justices examined law with “strict scrutiny.” Later in the 1970s, the government started programs to help blacks and minorities with affirmative action initiatives. However, the issue of Richmond v. Croson and the so-called Equal Protection Clause violation of a lack of minority subcontractors of J.A. Croson Company led to the debate of “reverse discrimination” and the dependence of the clause to race and classification (208-209). Consequently,

The Civil Rights act of 1964 along with Title VII gives employees the option to sue business owners based on color, race, sexual orientation, and religion. This act, rules on the fact, that individuals can take action if a discrimination or harassment issues happens at the employer’s workplace. It expands Civil Rights statues to provide more protection against people who are victimized due to discrimination. It sets the guidelines for job related issues due to disparate impact or treatment issues. However, this act does not assure that everyone who faces discrimination will be employed because frankly he is a minority. If it is felt that there is a possibility of

This is when Plessy v. Ferguson where the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not prohibit separate but equal facilities in America. This ruling paved the way for states to establish segregation policies that were followed for decades. Then in 1954, the Supreme Court overturned Plessy by way of Brown v. Board of Education. This decision marked the end of Jim Crow and the beginning of the policies aimed at promoting diversity in schools, the workplace, and other public facilities. Affirmative Action was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2003 in Grutter v. Bollinger. Then in Gratz v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for colleges to enforce racial or gender quotas. The well-known Bakke case showed flaws in Affirmative Action and brought about the term “reverse discrimination.” Ala Bakke, a white male, was denied admittance to a medical school when less qualified minority applicants had been accepted. The Supreme Court ruled against colleges that practiced inflexible quota systems in their Affirmative Action programs. The Court said the college had discriminated unfairly against a white applicant. As time has gone on more injustice was uncovered in regard to Affirmative Action. In the Wygant case in 1986 minority employees were allowed to keep their jobs while white employees with seniority were laid off. On the other side of the spectrum, however, was the Paradise case in 1987 where the Alabama Department of Public Safety refused to promote minority employees above entry level positions even though the court ordered them to. However, the landmark case surrounding Affirmative Action was heard in 2003 involving the University of Michigan Affirmative Action policies. This decision upheld Affirmative Action in higher education. The Court declared that rave can be one of =many factors that colleges use in selecting their students. They said the

Unfortunately due to our past history, discrimination had been among us from since decades. Discrimination and prejudice would probably be among us until the end of the world. Prejudice and discrimination is an action that treats people unfairly because of their membership in a particular social group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs to rather on that individual. It is an unfair treatment to a person, racial group, and minority. It is an action based on prejudice.