Affrimative Action Essay Research Paper Affirmative ActionThe — страница 2

  • Просмотров 297
  • Скачиваний 12
  • Размер файла 18
    Кб

Constitutional validity of “Jim Crow” laws depended on the idea that segregated public facilities were acceptable as long as they were roughly equivalent. In 1896 the Supreme Court once again held up the Constitutional validity of “Separate but Equal” in the case Plessy v. Ferguson. Around the turn of the century, 18 states had ruled against racial discrimination, but Southerners were maintaining their prejudices. The civil rights movement slowly began. The Supreme Court’s decisions gradually began to support the end of discrimination. In 1917, in the case of Buchanan v. Warley, the Court decided that a system of residential segregation enforced by the city of Louisville, Kentucky violated the Fourteenth Amendment. In 1941 President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed

Executive Order 8802, barring segregation by government defense contractors. Roosevelt’s actions increased black wartime employment and demonstrated that the federal government would take “affirmative” steps to help end racism. In 1956 the Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas that “Racial segregation in public education has a detrimental effect on minority children because it is interpreted as a sign of inferiority.” Separate but equal was no longer lawful. The civil rights movement continued, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other leaders fought for equal rights. In 1961, John Fitzgerald Kennedy became the first President to use the phrase “affirmative action” when he issued Executive Order 10952, creating the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and directing contractors on projects financed with federal funds to”take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during their employment, without regard to race, creed, color or national origin.” Kennedy was also interested in expanding educational and employment opportunities for minorities. Kennedy believed that “even the complete elimination of racial discrimination in employment – a goal toward which this nation must strive – will not put a single unemployed Negro to work unless he has the skills required.” In 1964 Congress passed a civil rights bill, “The Civil Rights Act of 1964″ which had largely been written by the Kennedy administration, but was finished by Lyndon

Johnson. There were seven major sections (Titles). Title I protected every citizen’s right to vote. Title II prohibited discrimination in privately-owned facilities open to the public, Title VI outlawed discrimination in federally-funded programs, and Title VII prohibited discrimination by both private and public employers. In 1978 the Supreme Court ruled on Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. The medical school set aside sixteen of one hundred total places ineach entering class for disadvantaged and minority students, who were considered in a separate admissions system. This case was important in deciding the fate of quotas, a controversial measure. The legitimacy of using “race-conscious remedies under some circumstances” was upheld, however the justices had

many separate opinions. One justice, Powell, argued to apply to Affirmative Action the standard of strict scrutiny, which was employed in assessing “invidious” discrimination, explained later. In 1995 the Supreme Court issued a closely divided opinion in Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pe a. The decision restricted, but did not strike down, Affirmative Action in the granting of federal highway construction contracts. Using the logic it had used against state and local governmental Affirmative Action programs in its 1989 decision in Richmond v. Croson, the Court in Adarand held that federal government Affirmative Action programs would also be subject to “strict scrutiny.” Prior to Croson and Adarand, courts applied separate tests for judging governmental action which

employed race as a criterion, depending on whether the use was “benign” (meant to include) or “invidious” (meant to exclude). If the use of race was invidious, a “strict scrutiny” standard applied, requiring that the government prove; first, it was necessary to achieve a compelling government interest, and second that it was narrowly tailored to accomplish this end. If the use of race was benign, an “intermediate scrutiny” standard only required that the government show the use of race was rationally related to accomplishing an important governmental goal. Another recent important case, Hopwood v. State of Texas has sent ripples through the educational world. It was brought by white applicants to the University of Texas claiming that they were discriminated