Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Transcript of Affirmative Action
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
United Steelworkers v. Webber
Monday, February 17, 2014
Vol XCIII, No. 311
The artist believes Affirmative Acton is a free ticket to college for minorities.
Richmond v. Croson
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
"Equal Justice under Law"
This artist believes that Affirmative Action isn't actually doing what it was meant to and is actually harming minorities.
-(1978), the Supreme Court ruled that a university's use of racial "quotas" in its admissions process was unconstitutional, but a school's use of "affirmative action" to accept more minority applicants was constitutional in some circumstances.
-Bakke sued the University of California in a state court, alleging that the medical school's admission policy violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The California Supreme Court agreed, finding that the quota system explicitly discriminated against racial groups and holding that "no applicant may be rejected because of his race, in favor of another who is less qualified, as measured by standards applied without regard to race.
The United Steelworkers of America and the Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation implemented an affirmative action-based training program to increase the number of the company's black skilled craft workers.
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII
Since the program sought to eliminate archaic patterns of racial segregation and hierarchy while not prohibiting white employees from advancing in the company, it was consistent with the intent of the law.
Civil Rights Act of 1964 didn't bar employers from favoring women & minorities
Grutter v. Bollinger & Gratz v. Bollinger
In the cases Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger (2003), the Supreme Court ruled that the use of affirmative action in school admission is constitutional, but point systems were not.
Barbara Grutter, a white Michigan resident whose application was rejected, sued the school in a lower federal court alleging that its admissions policy was unconstitutional.
Gratz v. Bollinger involved a challenge to the University of Michigan's undergraduate affirmative action program.
Richmond, Virginia created a set-aside program which required that a percentage of subcontracts for construction projects be reserved for minorities.
In1983, the Richmond City Council, in the state of Virginia, adopted the minority Business Utilization Plan (the Plan), which required government supported construction contractors to set-aside 30% of its subcontracts to one or more Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs)
The Appellant, J.A. Croson Company (Appellant), challenged the Plan on the grounds that it violated the United States Constitution because there had been no specific finding that the Plan’s purpose was supported by past discriminatory practices in the construction industry of Richmond, Virginia
The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".
SCOTUS upheld Affimative Action admissions policy.
Their point system's "predetermined point allocations" didn't allow for an individual to be assessed properly and was therefore unconstitutional.
Unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause
JFK issues Executive Order 10925 which creates the Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity and mandates that projects financed with federal funds "take affirmative action" to ensure that hiring and employment practices are free of racial bias.
March 6, 1961
Fisher v. University of Texas
Gonzales v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores
In April 2005, the U.S. District Court approved a settlement, valued at approximately $50 million, which requires Abercrombie & Fitch to provide monetary benefits to the class of Latino, African American, Asian American and female applicants and employees who charged the company with discrimination.
-Filed in June 2003, alleged that Abercrombie & Fitch violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by maintaining recruiting and hiring practices that excluded minorities and women and adopting a restrictive marketing image, and other policies, which limited minority and female employment
-The suit, brought by undergraduate Abigail Fisher in 2008, asked that the Court declare the University's race-conscious admissions inconsistent with Grutter. While reasserting that any consideration of race must be "narrowly tailored," with Fisher the Court did not go on to overrule Grutter
SCOTUS voided the lower appellate court's ruling in favor of the University and remanded the case, holding that the lower court had not applied the standard of strict scrutiny (articulated in Grutter v. Bollinger and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke) to the University's admissions program.
Ruling took Grutter and Bakke as given and did not directly revisit the constitutionality of using race as a factor in college admissions.
Sept. 24, 1965
Executive Order 11246 enforces affirmative action for the first time
Restrictions on Affirmative Action. Programs eliminated if it: (a) creates a quota; (b) creates preferences for unqualified individuals; (c) creates reverse discrimination; or (d) continues even after its equal opportunity purposes have been achieved."
July 19, 1995
Proposition 209 enacted in California. "The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting."
Nov. 3, 1997
Initiative 200, which is similar to California's Proposition 209, is enacted in Washington State.
Dec. 3, 1998
Florida bans race as factor in college admissions as an attempt to rid Affirmative Action.
Feb. 22, 2000
SCOTUS rules against considering race to integrate schools in Parents v. Seattle and Meredith v. Jefferson. Programs that tried to maintain diversity in schools by considering race when assigning students to schools are unconstitutional.
June 28, 2006
Ballot proposing to ban affirmative action goes before voters in Nebraska and Colorado. The ban passes in Nebraska, but voters in CO reject it.
November 4, 2008
LII / Legal Information Institute.
N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Mar. 2014.
"Affirmative Action: Court Cases."
. National Conference of State Legislatures, n.d.
Brunner, Borgna. "Timeline of Affirmative Action Milestones."
. Infoplease, n.d.
Web. 09 Mar. 2014.
Huber, Jim. ""Politically Correct" Cartoons March 30, 2003 on Affirmative Action College
"Politically Correct" Cartoons March 30, 2003 on Affirmative Action
. N.p., 30 Mar. 2003. Web. 11 Mar. 2014.
"REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA v. BAKKE."
Regents of the University of
California v. Bakke
. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Mar. 2014.
"UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA v. WEBER."
United Steelworkers of America v.
. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2014.