The Pros And Cons Of Affirmative Action

Affirmative action will also assist the university in reaching their desired diversity quota. In June, the Supreme Court ruled that universities can consider race as one of the main

Affirmative action, and race-based admissions standards, are the best way to increase (or maintain) diversity at institutions of higher learning. In spite of its perceived flaws, it has increased the diversity at previously all-white institutions of higher learning, such as the University of Texas at Austin, and that diversity has allowed friendships to be formed that otherwise would not have been, has allowed students to learn from professors they otherwise would never have and allowed professors to learn from students from a wide variety of

California's decision in 1996 to outlaw the use of race in public college admissions was widely viewed as the beginning of the end for affirmative action at public universities all over the United States. But in the four years since Californians passed Proposition 209, most states have agreed that killing affirmative action outright would deepen social inequality by denying minority citizens access to higher education. The half-dozen states that are actually thinking about abandoning race-sensitive

One of the most problematic and controversial issues in The United States of America is affirmative action. Affirmative action is a policy of affording minorities certain privileges in order to combat the historical prejudice against them. In an effort to redress the historical injustices faced by African Americans, Hispanics, and other minorities, universities and employers across the nation have taken race into account when admitting students or hiring employees. Abigail Fisher, of Texas, applied for admission into the University of Texas at Austin (UT) and was denied; she sued the public university on the grounds of racial discrimination or reverse racism in the supreme court case Fisher v University of Texas.

Affirmative Action is one of the many social issues facing America today. Affirmative action was signed into place in 1961 by President Kennedy and allows minority groups or people who face discrimination to become employed or get an education that is equal to that of a white male. Groups that Affirmative Action aims to help are women, blacks, Latinos, and people with disabilities. While these policies were signed to slowly rid the workforce and schools from discrimination, it hurts people who do not face discrimination, specifically whites. Many white men and women lose special opportunities to work or go to college because of certain standards that the Affirmative Action laws require. Universities and the military require a certain number of minorities in order to meet the standards and have a more diverse atmosphere. An example of this is the California V. Bakke supreme court case of 1978.

Companies and educational institutions greatly benefit from the guidelines of affirmative action because they profit from the different ideas, work styles, and contributions unique to each diverse individual. As quoted in Paul Connors’s compilation, Affirmative Action, President of Columbia University, Lee Bollinger, addresses the importance of a diverse educational system by stating, “The experience of arriving on a campus to live and study with classmates from a diverse range of backgrounds is essential to students' training for this new world, nurturing in them an instinct to reach out instead of clinging to the comforts of what seems natural or familiar” (12-13). A statement by Southeastern Oklahoma State University further supports the idea that success in modern day society stems from diversity saying, “Our country is strong because of the rich diversity of our culture, not in spite of it” (Affirmative Action).

If institutions of higher education are to keep open minded campuses, they will have to combat beliefs of mismatching so that Affirmative Action(AA) can keep making a difference. Diversifying schools, giving minorities the opportunity of receiving a quality education, and combating stereotypes are three of the many ways AA has been making a difference. Additionally, institutions can advocate for the success AA has had in educating minorities by promoting and advertising fellow AA beneficiaries at their campuses. An example would be the advertisement of Sonia Sotomayor who attended Princeton University thanks to AA. Through AA institutions of higher education are able to alter the social construct of their campuses in order to make the world a more accepting place for change and difference. AA is currently being viewed by some as a negative force for minority youth applying to colleges due to

Race-based affirmative action is practiced today by public universities throughout the nation. For example, in June of 2016 the United States Supreme Court ruled in Fisher v University of Texas that the University of Texas at Austin’s race-based affirmative action program was constitutional and, thus, the university would be able to continue said program. In addition, New York University indicates on their website that they, too, practice race-based affirmative action. However, while affirmative action is practiced at universities across the United States not everyone agrees with such policies. Many argue that such policies don’t adequately achieve their intended effect,

The implementation of race-based affirmative action policies for college admission has been a controversial issue that has made its way into Supreme Court cases. Some argue that it is to counter racial inequality that minorities have suffered from while others believe affirmative action enforces reverse racism. The unconstitutionality of affirmative action has gone through the justice system and been addressed by the Supreme Court multiple times in cases such as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke [1978] and Gratz v. Bollinger [2003]. Changes must be made to ensure all student applicants are treated fairly in the college admissions process. Racial quota systems in state supported universities violate both the Civil Rights Act

Affirmative action and any race-positive policies should be dismantled; I disagree with affirmative action. Better stated from the debate question: like Jim Crow, affirmative action is invidious racial discrimination. Affirmative action should take the path similarly to that taken in California – become abolished. Affirmative action does discriminate on a racial level. Affirmative action implies that minorities cannot achieve a certain goal without the help of a race-positive policy, which is invidious racial discrimination. While policies developed to create diversity may (or may not) bring in diversity, the policies are damaging and create a “second-class ‘minority degree.’” (Scalia, 1979) Colleges and employers should look at substance and

Mulnere, Kaitlyn. "Should Low Income Students Get More Preferences in College Admissions?" Money. www.time.com/money/4176157/economic-affirmative-action-low-income-students-college-admissions Accessed 20 February 2018.

Most people have at least a general idea of what affirmative action is. In short, affirmative action is a legislative policy that gives preference to certain races or ethnicities for government jobs or for publicly funded university admissions. Affirmative action was created over 50 years ago as a way of “leveling the playing field” for minorities who are not often highly represented in colleges or certain careers. This does not change the fact that affirmative action is a deeply flawed idea. Although affirmative action was created with good intentions, the policy needs to be outlawed, as it is discriminatory, detrimental to the country, and does not work as intended.

Affirmative action is a discriminatory idea that individuals deserve acceptance or priority based on race rather than merit. Very often when colleges are deciding on which students get accepted, better qualified applicants are passed over in favor of students who are African American or Hispanic. The Department of Justice recently decided that they would look into the racism concerning affirmative action policies in college admissions. People may be unaware that the groups of people affirmative action hurts most are actually minorities as well, such as Jews and Asian-Americans.

Today, affirmative action is trying to treat people equally by unequally treating others to solve the problem when in fact creating more problems. The synonyms for the term “affirmative action” is anti-discrimination, equals right policy, and fair treatment. However, does the term live up to its true meaning of equal opportunities? Affirmative action has been a controversial topic ever since President Johnson issued the Executive Order in 1965. As stated, the order would increase the numbers of minorities in jobs and schools nationwide. As a minority myself, I do not think the policy longer applies to today’s jobs and education systems, but instead does the complete opposite. Others will say, “the third fallacy is, affirmative action does not

Affirmative Action is nothing but discrimination wrapped up in a pretty box and it does no good to anyone. Now I know that this is a rather bold statement, so let me explain. Affirmative Action is when you give someone preference when they are applying for college or a job based on their race or gender, but it’s okay because they are a minority. Now this makes affirmative action discriminatory by its very nature. What’s worse is that Affirmative Action promotes the racist attitude that minorities are incapable of getting the jobs or getting into college on their own. Now even putting racism aside, isn’t this a rather condescending attitude to say, “Oh you poor thing let me put you in here you didn’t earn it put that’s ok I feel sorry for you?”