Affirmative action - Research Paper Example

Topic: affirmative action Thesis ment: There is need to test the ground of affirmative action favoring policy on discrimination against minority and not favoring policy on reverse discrimination against majority.IntroductionAffirmative action programs have a history in the US since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The federal government distributes resources for providing educational and job opportunities to minority groups that were discriminated on the basis of race, sex, and disability historically.

Although not one amongst the discriminated, the issue appeals me because of economic and social wide effects of the decisions taken by the Supreme Court in favor and against some policy matters on discrimination and reverse discrimination (Encyclopedia, Affirmative Action).In its volatile history of 48 years, affirmative action has been both appreciated for better economic opportunities to minorities and scorned at for injustice to the majority community in the name of compensating minorities.

The term “Affirmative Action” was first used by President Kennedy in 1961 for correcting discrimination that prevailed although civil rights laws and constitutional guarantees were in force. The issue resurfaced in a major way in 2003 when the Supreme Court awarded a decision related to affirmative action in universities permitting education institutions to factor race in admissions not to be used mechanically and conservatively. The decision of the highest court has been applauded by one and all.

We just cannot ignore the importance of such actions as they impact the whole fabric of society and international community (Brunner, Affirmative Action History).Let’s analyze the contents of the court ruling and identify the issues at stake. The ruling allowed race to be used a criterion to decide university admissions but there was a very thin line of difference in the judges’ opinion on not taking the benefit seamlessly. In two different but parallel cases, Grutter v. Bollinger (case no. 02-0241) involving the University of Michigans law school, the judges voted 5-4 to continue the University of Michigan’s law school affirmative action policy, which advocates minorities cause; and Gratz v.

Bollinger (no. 02-0516) involving the undergraduate program, wherein the judges voted 6-3 to expunge the affirmative action policy for undergraduate admissions by giving 20 points to blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans on an admissions rating scale (CNN, 2003). In the case of Grutter v. Bollinger of the university law school wherein Barbara Grutter, a white, couldn’t get admission in 1996 because African-Americans and ethnic minorities had the benefit of point system over the white. In the other case, the court decided against the policy of giving priority to race in admissions (npr.org, 2009).

According to the Newsweek PSRA 1/03, percentage of people agreeing on increasing efforts to search qualified minority applicants was highest – 44 percent to setting quotas – 38 percent as shown below. The graph below depicts a scenario similar to the University of Michigan affirmative action program which was finally decided by the Supreme Court in 2003.One could see student protestors rallying outside the university campus against anti-affirmative action by the university.The above data shows that economic affirmative action is a better attempt to race-based affirmative action.

The issue of diversity in the classroom was recognized by the Supreme Court for getting wider social value but it should not lead to unconstitutional policies. The related cases had impact on public, tax-supported institutions, not private bodies. In a way, constitutionality of affirmative action was confirmed by the court decision (CNN, 2003).Another crucial issue of dealing such cases more creatively and less literally was identified so that a racial preference program may not be partial to white students and discriminate them unconstitutionally.

Minority applicants although not getting quota and point advantage, still could expect favor by creative decisions, which are not rigid but elastic. Further, the issue related to the equal protection clause violated by the undergraduate policy was acknowledged by the ruling of the court. Contribution of the law school policy in promoting cross-racial understanding, in pushing the racial stereotypes barriers, and creating better understanding of races was underlined by the respective court (CNN, 2003).

The court decision was applauded by all sections of education bodies including OCA -- the Organization of Chinese Americans, a civil rights advocacy and educational organization (OCA, 2003). References: Brunner, Borgna. Affirmative action history: A history and timeline of affirmative action. Retrieved April 29, 2009, from http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/society/A0802658.htmlhttp://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmative1.htmlCNN. Narrow use of affirmative action preserved in college admissions.

(2003, December 26) Retrieved April 29, 2009, from http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/23/scotus.affirmative.action/Encyclopedia. Affirmative action. Retrieved April 29, 2009, fromhttp://www.infoplease.com/ce6/society/A0802658.htmlOCA applauds Supreme Court decision to uphold affirmative action admissions policy. (2003, July 10) Retrieved April 29, 2009, from http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/admissions/statements/ruling/oca.htmlNpr.org. Split ruling on affirmative action: High Court rules on race as factor in university admissions.

(2003, June 23) Retrieved April 29, 2009, from http://www.npr.org/news/specials/michigan/