Fiveable
Fiveable
pep
Fiveable
Fiveable

or

Log in

Find what you need to study


Light

3.13 Affirmative Action

6 min readfebruary 4, 2023

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Attend a live cram event

Review all units live with expert teachers & students

Introduction

Affirmative action refers to policies and programs aimed at promoting equal opportunity and diversity in areas such as education and employment. These programs often give special consideration to historically underrepresented groups, such as women and minorities, in an effort to address past discrimination and promote diversity.

Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous legal challenges and remains a controversial issue in the United States. Supporters argue that it is necessary to level the playing field and provide equal opportunities for historically marginalized groups. Critics argue that it is reverse discrimination and undermines the merit-based principles of education and employment.

The Supreme Court has issued several decisions related to affirmative action, including Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003). In these cases, the Court has upheld the use of race as a factor in university admissions, but has placed limits on the extent to which race can be used and has emphasized the need for narrowly tailored programs.

Affirmative action remains a complex and evolving issue, with ongoing debates about its effectiveness, fairness, and constitutionality.

Key Terms

Colorblind" Constitution

"Colorblind" Constitution refers to the interpretation of the US Constitution that race should not be considered in legal or political decision making. This interpretation is based on the idea that the Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law for all citizens, regardless of race, and that the government should be neutral and impartial with regard to race. Proponents of a "colorblind" Constitution believe that affirmative action and other race-conscious policies are discriminatory and that the best way to achieve racial equality is to ignore race altogether.

Critics argue that this interpretation ignores the historical and ongoing impact of racism and discrimination, and that race-conscious policies are necessary to address past and present injustices. The concept of a "colorblind" Constitution continues to be a subject of debate and is an ongoing issue in discussions about race, equal protection, and the role of government in promoting equality.

Equal Protection Clause

The Equal Protection Clause is a provision in the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution that guarantees equal protection under the law for all citizens. The clause states that "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."

The Equal Protection Clause is a cornerstone of civil rights in the United States, and has been used to strike down laws and policies that discriminate based on race, gender, religion, and other personal characteristics. The clause has also been used to support affirmative action programs, as long as they are narrowly tailored to address past discrimination and promote diversity.

The interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause has evolved over time, and the Supreme Court has issued several landmark decisions interpreting the clause, including Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which struck down segregation in public schools, and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), which considered the constitutionality of affirmative action in university admissions.

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) & Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) and Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) were two cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that considered the use of race in university admissions.

In Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's use of race as a factor in its admissions process, ruling that the law school's policy was narrowly tailored to achieve diversity and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In Gratz v. Bollinger, the Court struck down the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, which automatically awarded 20 points to underrepresented minority applicants, as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The Court found that the policy was too mechanical and inflexible, and did not adequately consider the individual circumstances of each applicant.

These cases have had a significant impact on the use of race in university admissions and have helped to define the constitutional boundaries of affirmative action programs. The Court has held that the use of race in admissions is constitutional as long as it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest in promoting diversity.

Key Takeaways

Key Terms to Review (18)

"Colorblind" Constitution

: This term refers to the idea that the U.S. Constitution does not see race or ethnicity and treats all citizens equally regardless of their racial background.

14th Amendment

: The 14th Amendment grants citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” including former slaves, and guarantees all citizens “equal protection of the laws.”

Affirmative Action

: Affirmative action is a policy that aims to increase opportunities in the workplace or education for underrepresented parts of society by considering race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

Brown v. Board of Education

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1954 that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional.

Diversity

: Diversity refers to understanding that each individual is unique and recognizing our individual differences. These can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs or other ideologies.

Equal Opportunity

: Equal opportunity refers to the policy that all individuals should have an equal chance to apply and be selected for jobs regardless of their gender, age, race, religion or disability.

Equal Protection Clause

: Part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution providing that no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".

Gratz v. Bollinger

: A Supreme Court case decided in 2003 where it was ruled that a point-based system for undergraduate admissions that gave extra points to minority applicants was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Grutter v. Bollinger

: A Supreme Court case in 2003 that upheld affirmative action admissions policy at University of Michigan Law School.

Historically Underrepresented Groups

: These are groups of people who have traditionally been denied full participation in various aspects of society, such as education and employment, due to their race, gender, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics.

Legal Challenges

: Legal challenges are formal objections questioning the legality or constitutionality of a law, policy, decision, etc., typically presented in court.

Merit-Based Principles

: Merit-based principles refer to the idea that individuals should be chosen for jobs, promotions, scholarships etc., based on their abilities and qualifications rather than factors such as favoritism, nepotism or discrimination.

Narrowly Tailored Programs

: These are programs or policies that are specifically designed to address a particular issue or problem, with minimal impact on other areas. In the context of US government, this often refers to laws or regulations that are carefully crafted to achieve a specific goal without infringing on individual rights.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1978 that ruled the use of racial quotas in college admissions is unconstitutional, but race can be one factor among many considered in a holistic review.

Reverse Discrimination

: This is perceived unfairness towards members of majority or historically advantaged groups resulting from policies intended to correct previous discrimination against minority or disadvantaged groups.

Special Consideration

: This refers to giving extra attention or priority to certain individuals or groups because they have been disadvantaged in some way.

Supreme Court Decisions

: These are rulings made by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is the highest court in the land. These decisions serve as precedents that guide lower courts' interpretations of law.

Use of Race

: The consideration or application of an individual's race when making decisions, often in the context of affirmative action or diversity initiatives.

3.13 Affirmative Action

6 min readfebruary 4, 2023

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Annika Tekumulla

Annika Tekumulla

Riya Patel

Riya Patel

Attend a live cram event

Review all units live with expert teachers & students

Introduction

Affirmative action refers to policies and programs aimed at promoting equal opportunity and diversity in areas such as education and employment. These programs often give special consideration to historically underrepresented groups, such as women and minorities, in an effort to address past discrimination and promote diversity.

Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous legal challenges and remains a controversial issue in the United States. Supporters argue that it is necessary to level the playing field and provide equal opportunities for historically marginalized groups. Critics argue that it is reverse discrimination and undermines the merit-based principles of education and employment.

The Supreme Court has issued several decisions related to affirmative action, including Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003). In these cases, the Court has upheld the use of race as a factor in university admissions, but has placed limits on the extent to which race can be used and has emphasized the need for narrowly tailored programs.

Affirmative action remains a complex and evolving issue, with ongoing debates about its effectiveness, fairness, and constitutionality.

Key Terms

Colorblind" Constitution

"Colorblind" Constitution refers to the interpretation of the US Constitution that race should not be considered in legal or political decision making. This interpretation is based on the idea that the Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law for all citizens, regardless of race, and that the government should be neutral and impartial with regard to race. Proponents of a "colorblind" Constitution believe that affirmative action and other race-conscious policies are discriminatory and that the best way to achieve racial equality is to ignore race altogether.

Critics argue that this interpretation ignores the historical and ongoing impact of racism and discrimination, and that race-conscious policies are necessary to address past and present injustices. The concept of a "colorblind" Constitution continues to be a subject of debate and is an ongoing issue in discussions about race, equal protection, and the role of government in promoting equality.

Equal Protection Clause

The Equal Protection Clause is a provision in the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution that guarantees equal protection under the law for all citizens. The clause states that "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."

The Equal Protection Clause is a cornerstone of civil rights in the United States, and has been used to strike down laws and policies that discriminate based on race, gender, religion, and other personal characteristics. The clause has also been used to support affirmative action programs, as long as they are narrowly tailored to address past discrimination and promote diversity.

The interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause has evolved over time, and the Supreme Court has issued several landmark decisions interpreting the clause, including Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which struck down segregation in public schools, and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), which considered the constitutionality of affirmative action in university admissions.

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) & Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) and Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) were two cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that considered the use of race in university admissions.

In Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's use of race as a factor in its admissions process, ruling that the law school's policy was narrowly tailored to achieve diversity and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In Gratz v. Bollinger, the Court struck down the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, which automatically awarded 20 points to underrepresented minority applicants, as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The Court found that the policy was too mechanical and inflexible, and did not adequately consider the individual circumstances of each applicant.

These cases have had a significant impact on the use of race in university admissions and have helped to define the constitutional boundaries of affirmative action programs. The Court has held that the use of race in admissions is constitutional as long as it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest in promoting diversity.

Key Takeaways

Key Terms to Review (18)

"Colorblind" Constitution

: This term refers to the idea that the U.S. Constitution does not see race or ethnicity and treats all citizens equally regardless of their racial background.

14th Amendment

: The 14th Amendment grants citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” including former slaves, and guarantees all citizens “equal protection of the laws.”

Affirmative Action

: Affirmative action is a policy that aims to increase opportunities in the workplace or education for underrepresented parts of society by considering race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

Brown v. Board of Education

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1954 that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional.

Diversity

: Diversity refers to understanding that each individual is unique and recognizing our individual differences. These can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs or other ideologies.

Equal Opportunity

: Equal opportunity refers to the policy that all individuals should have an equal chance to apply and be selected for jobs regardless of their gender, age, race, religion or disability.

Equal Protection Clause

: Part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution providing that no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".

Gratz v. Bollinger

: A Supreme Court case decided in 2003 where it was ruled that a point-based system for undergraduate admissions that gave extra points to minority applicants was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Grutter v. Bollinger

: A Supreme Court case in 2003 that upheld affirmative action admissions policy at University of Michigan Law School.

Historically Underrepresented Groups

: These are groups of people who have traditionally been denied full participation in various aspects of society, such as education and employment, due to their race, gender, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics.

Legal Challenges

: Legal challenges are formal objections questioning the legality or constitutionality of a law, policy, decision, etc., typically presented in court.

Merit-Based Principles

: Merit-based principles refer to the idea that individuals should be chosen for jobs, promotions, scholarships etc., based on their abilities and qualifications rather than factors such as favoritism, nepotism or discrimination.

Narrowly Tailored Programs

: These are programs or policies that are specifically designed to address a particular issue or problem, with minimal impact on other areas. In the context of US government, this often refers to laws or regulations that are carefully crafted to achieve a specific goal without infringing on individual rights.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

: A landmark Supreme Court case in 1978 that ruled the use of racial quotas in college admissions is unconstitutional, but race can be one factor among many considered in a holistic review.

Reverse Discrimination

: This is perceived unfairness towards members of majority or historically advantaged groups resulting from policies intended to correct previous discrimination against minority or disadvantaged groups.

Special Consideration

: This refers to giving extra attention or priority to certain individuals or groups because they have been disadvantaged in some way.

Supreme Court Decisions

: These are rulings made by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is the highest court in the land. These decisions serve as precedents that guide lower courts' interpretations of law.

Use of Race

: The consideration or application of an individual's race when making decisions, often in the context of affirmative action or diversity initiatives.


© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.


© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.