Affirmative action was designed by the federal government and seemed to be a strong tactic but there are many imperfections in this policy. For example, California vs Bakke is a famous court case based off of reverse discrimination. A white male by the name Allan Bakke was denied admission to The University of California medical school. Instead of picking Bakke the school accepted a less qualified black male because the school must accept at least 16 minorities out of 100 into the medical program. The university uses race as an aid to admit minorities and increase diversity instead of accepting well qualified individuals.
A Right Made Decision Not only the Brown and Board of Education was a prominent historic event in which it highlighted a turning point of the United States government, but its victory also proved how Americans upheld the true meaning of the American Independence Declaration that “all men are created equal”. Supreme Court’s ruled in favor of the Brown and Board of Education and against the states’ law in 1954 was the right decision because it reflects the important role and the great effect of the legislature in translating the laws. Black people were extremely discriminated and heavily stigmatized because of the white racial stereotype prior to 20th century, especially in the southern states. During the Reconstruction period, even though Congress
As Ratana explained, “It is unconstitutional for any institution to employ a racial quota under the Equal Protection Clause. Also, state laws do not supersede the law of the land. Affirmative action just factors in race as one of the many criteria that institutions use in the consideration of who to admit into colleges and employ”. One of the main purposes of the Affirmative action policy was to create a more diverse community. However, some universities have argued by saying that the ban of the policy is so that they can ensure a diverse community.
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution designed to guarantee equal rights for women. The ERA was originally written by Alice Paul and Crystal Eastman. In 1923, it was introduced in the Congress for the first time. The ERA has always been highly controversial regarding the meaning of equality for women. Middle-class women generally were supportive.
Equal Rights “We have talked long enough in this country about equal rights it is time now to write the next chapter- and to write it in the books of laws.” Lyndon B. Johnson. An Equal Right amendment was first passed by women political party in 1923. It didn’t pass and it took four decades for a revival into congress. It seemed like it was going to be passed back in 1971 when it was approved by ⅔ vote from the House of Representatives in October of that year.
Cox (2009) explain the logic in the numbers by asserting that “African Americans are convicted more frequently than Caucasians and other races (making up fifty-nine percent of persons convicted of drug offenses), African Americans are subjected to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines more frequently. "(Cox, 2009, p.23) Wooldredge (2007) correlates social and economic disadvantages as being a driving factor minorities being an easy target for felony convictions. Wooldredge (2007) believes that Sentences are more severe for minority defendants from more social And economically disadvantaged areas within jurisdictions.(Wooldredge, 2007, p.239) Disenfranchisement of felons, especially African-Americans have brought with it a large growing concern
Most affirmative action is required by the federal government or the court, but many business use it voluntarily. Affirmative Action In Education After the Bakke decision, many colleges were considering race to achieve a diverse student body. Affirmative Action in Other Areas In 1995, Adarand Constructors, Inc v. Pena, the court overturned earlier decisions by saying that federal agencies could not automatically favor minority based companies for federal contracts.
For generations now, powerful and brave women in the United States have cajoled citizens, members of Congress and government officials to ratify a Constitutional amendment that states “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” In 1923, during the 75th anniversary of the 1848 Women’s Rights convention in Seneca Falls, women’s rights activist Alice Paul created the “Lucretia Mott Amendment” which would grant men and women equal rights throughout the United States. On March 22, 1972, the amendment now titled the “Equal Rights Amendment” passed the U.S Senate and House of Representatives and was to be sent to the states for approval. However, once the seven-year deadline on the ratification process came to an end in 1979, the amendment’s proponents lacked the ratification by 38 states and thus the proposed 27th amendment for equal rights was terminated. The ERA advocates continue to work together and utilize each other's resources in hope to finally pass the bill.
After all, it gives minorities what some would call, an unfair advantage. One point Anne Hull makes in her article “Affirmative Action Hurts White People” concerns readers that affirmative action is unconstitutional. She goes into detail by telling the story of a girl named Jennifer Gratz, a white applicant rejected from her dream college. Jennifer claimed that though she had worked extremely hard to have polished credentials, she fell short to a minority student with the same GPA and test scores all because of race. After being rejected, Gratz pursued a lawsuit against the University of Michigan, raising the question if affirmative action is still need in higher education (Hull 31).
The Equal Rights Amendment was passed to eliminate the discrimination on women and men to have equal rights throughout the United States. Political campaign and politicians were trying to go against voters from supporting the Equal Rights Amendment but Phyllis Schlafly attracted the attention of the nation and she points out that equality of rights under the law should not be denied by the United States or by any state because of gender. People agree with her because she believes equality of rights would eliminate laws that protected women and if the amendment became law they will lose preferential treatment in child custody, legally be subject to the draft and might get less pay from child support. Phyllis says, “why do we have to lower ourselves
Affirmative action is controversial in the united states. Affirmative action was first spoken of by the Supreme Court in the case of Allan Bakke. Bakke argued that his grades and test scores had ranked him well above many students who had been accepted at the school and that the only likely clarification for his denial was that he was white, whereas those others accepted were black or Latino. Bakke won his case in 1978 before the supreme court and was admitted to the medical school, but he failed in getting affirmative action declared unconstitutional. (Ginsberg et al.
Affirmative action has become obsolete in today’s society. Affirmative action is an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women; also: a similar effort to promote the rights or progress of other disadvantaged persons (Merriam-Webster, 2011). Today’s affirmative action will demoralize the very concepts that the policy was implemented to uphold: those of equality for all people regardless of color and discrimination. This policy supports racial multiplicity at the price of distinction, impartiality and experience; it also follows the line of reverse discrimination and sexual bias against white men (Reyna, Tucker, Korfmacher, & Henry, 2005).
Weak affirmative action which is just an effort to ensure that all qualified minority groups are considered whereas the strong one is when some sort of preference is given to the minority candidate. Later the author concludes that he will focus on the strong affirmative action because it is the most controversial one. Then the author gives us many arguments of different people and critics for and against affirmative action. Later on, David Boonin gives us his own arguments in favor of affirmative action which are 1) the unfair disadvantage argument; 2) the (other) compensation argument; 3) the appeal to diversity; 4) the need for role models; 5) the bias-elimination argument; 6) race as a qualification. “I conclude that while affirmative action may prove to have some desirable features and some beneficial consequences, there’s no reason to believe that it’s morally obligatory.
We are now living in a time of discrimination. I asked two questions later, but I would like to add another question and I want to talk about it and I hope to answer it or give the answer to the people. When will discrimination end?. Many people have suffered and are still at risk of racism or racial discrimination, so Racism is a doctrine based on discrimination between people according to their sexual origin and color.
Throughout many of the affirmative action legal cases, one of the main arguments from proponents is that it is necessary in order to right the wrongs of past racial discrimination. Some say that affirmative action is justified because even though white applicants may be more qualified, this is only because they did not face the same hardships as their minority counterparts (Rachels, Ethics, 1973). Many argue if we do not integrate disadvantaged minorities into mainstream social institutions, they will continue to suffer the discrimination that has plagued our country for centuries and that this is detrimental to not only the minorities but also society as a whole (Anderson, 2002, 1270–71). However, the debate has recently shifted to the benefits of diversity in the classroom which the Supreme Court has affirmed as being a positive thing
