Affirmative Action - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 11
About This Presentation
Title:

Affirmative Action

Description:

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (applies to some states, not all) ... (University of Wisconsin - Madison). Merchant, Shouger. ( 2004, April 26) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:94
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 12
Provided by: JonP89
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Affirmative Action


1
Affirmative Action
  • Why the Debate?

2
What is Affirmative Action?
  • Affirmative action is a government policy/program
    that seeks to redress past injustices against
    specified groups by making special efforts to
    provide members of these groups with the access
    to educational and employment opportunities
  • Introduced as a means of integration
  • Affirmative Action also dealt with issues
    revolving around equal opportunity employment and
    federal contract compliance


3
The Key Issue
  • On whom should the burden of proof in Affirmative
    Action cases be directed, on the plaintiff (i.e.
    the employee) or the defendant (i.e. the
    employer)?
  • A series of court cases would address this
    question as well as the constitutionality of the
    Affirmative Action initiative

4
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
(1978)
  • A white male named Allan Bakke sues the U of
    California at Davis Medical School on the basis
    that he had been denied admission because of his
    race
  • The school had reserved 16 percent of the
    admission slots for minorities
  • Bakke won his case and was admitted
  • However, Affirmative Action not ruled
    unconstitutional
  • Quota system rejected but being a minority could
    be used for consideration in these decisions

Courtesy www.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/bakke
vis.html
5
Wards Cove v. Atonio (1989)
  • Further supports Bakke case
  • Burden of proof shifted from the defendant (the
    employer) to the plaintiff (the employee claiming
    discrimination)
  • Also, A. Action policies already approved by fed.
    courts could be challenged by non- minorities
    claiming discrimination

6
Adarand Constructors v. Pena (1995)
  • Further weakened A. Action
  • all A. Action policies put under strict scrutiny
    by govt
  • Clintons idea to mend, not end A. Action

7
Hopwood v. State of Texas (1996)
  • White students said that the admission practices
    discriminated against them
  • The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
    (applies to some states, not all) supported their
    case, outlawing race considerations for
    scholarships and admission in state schools
  • A lot of back and forth cases followed

Courtesy LA Times. http//www.latimes.com/include
s/ramirez/ramirez_20030624.gif
8
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)
  • Bollinger, the president of the U of Michigan,
    accused that the admissions point system (giving
    minorities 20 out of 150 points) promoted
    discrimination
  • Received a lot of news attn.
  • Court decided that this point system was as bad
    as quota system rejected in Bakke

9
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
  • Challenged U of Ms Law School admissions
    practices
  • Court allowed race to be considered (not used in
    a mechanical way) in admissions but the policy
    was to be still under strict scrutiny
  • strengthened A. Action

10
Is Affirmative Action Helpful?
  • YES
  • compensates for past injustices
  • levels the playing field
  • is not a big issue when there is equal
    credibility among candidates
  • even with A.Action, white males hold around 95
    percent of high level corporate jobs
  • discrimination still a serious problem
  • veterans get benefits and preference as well as
    their descendents
  • racism prevents talented minority candidates
    from landing the job they want (Shouger
    Merchant)
  • Is not perfect, but is a step towards equality
  • Mend it, dont end it (President Clinton)
  • NO
  • minorities statistically have higher failure
    rates
  • promotes discrimination to non-minorities
  • hinders minorities credibility and respect
  • not responsible for ancestors indiscretions
  • promote inequality
  • minority students should not have to defend
    themselves and their accomplishments (Nicole
    Marklein)
  • classification of race is becoming increasingly
    difficult
  • If they dont want me because Im black, I dont
    want to work with that company anyway. Who wants
    to be in a racially discriminatory workplace?
    (Anonymous)

11
  • This debate is far from over. Court cases and
    rulings will continue in the future and may
    reshaped the use of Affirmative Action procedures.

Sources Ginsberg, B., Lowi, T., Weir, M.
(2005). We the People (5th ed.). New York W.W.
Norton and Company Inc. Marklein, Nicole. (2003,
October 1). Affirmative Action Decision a Missed
Opportunity. Badger Herald. (University of
Wisconsin - Madison). Merchant, Shouger. (2004,
April 26). Affirmative and Negative Action.
Daily Illini. (University of Illinois).
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com