Diversity Inclusion and Modern-Day Affirmative Action Thoughts.

Bakke v. Regents

           The case of Bakke v. Regents of the University of California Medical School Davis (Davis) was a question of the use of racial quotas (“University”, 2013). In this case a white man; Bakke Certiorari had repeatedly attempted to gain admission to the Medical school (Davis) and was denied in 1973 and 1974. At the time, Davis used two different admissions processes: one that weighed science scores, grade point average, Medical College Admissions Test scores and interview scores, and a second that allowed for lower test score, lower interview scores, and lower interview ratings for "economically and/or educationally disadvantaged" groups of African Americans, Asian Americans, Chicano Americans, and Native Americans (“University”, 2013). During both admission attempts, Bakke was denied admission and not placed on a waiting list even though those with significantly lower scores were admitted to the school or placed on the list. Mr. Bakke became upset when he realized that 16 out of the 100 admission spaces were reserved for those second group of "economically and/or educationally disadvantaged" (Howe, 2013). Bakke filed suit on the grounds of reverse discrimination, and the California Supreme Court agreed with him based on the fact that Bakke was denied consideration in the second group solely because of his race (Career Education Corporation (CEC), 2013). In the decision, the court ruled that the use of racial quotas itself was unconstitutional, but may be considered equally along with other admission factors (McBride, 2007). 

The original intent of Affirmative Action; was it fair? Current opinion?

           Affirmative Action is a tool for trying to achieve racial equality in the workplace, government contracts, and educational surroundings (“Affirmative”, 2013). The first reference to Affirmative action was in Executive Order 11246 signed by President Lyndon Johnson in 1965 (CEC, 2013). It required those attempting to get government contracts to take specific measures that includes record keeping in order to ensure equality in the hiring process (Brunner, 2007). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 orders equal employment chances and bans discrimination based on race, religion, gender, color, or national origin (CEC, 2013). Since there have been additions that ban discrimination based on age, sexual preference, disabilities, and more. Affirmative action was a method to ensure that these laws were abided by. 

           In the past, Affirmative Action was definitely a needed piece of legislation. It is unfortunate, but true: our country has a history of racial discrimination. The legacy of racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination tell of the need for laws such as the Civil Rights Act, creation of the EEOC, and one of the main methods of leveling the playing field; Affirmative Action (“Affirmative”, 2013).  And it has helped; as evidenced by the election of the country’s first African American President: Barak Obama in 2008 (Kerby, 2008). 

           When forming the opinion of weather Affirmative Actions is still needed, one should look deep into the issues. Sure, we have made tremendous progress. But how can one say that we are done with our diversity inclusion journey? Consider that the very demographic make-up of our country is changing: Some estimate that half of the babies born today are of color and that by 2050 we may have no racial majority in this country (Kerby, 2012). Look at the gap in education: While some estimates have 28% of Americans over the age of 25 have a four-year degree, those same estimates say that only 17% of African Americans have that same degree and only 13% of Hispanics (Kerby, 2012). Look at the example of the 60 Fortune 500 companies that supported the racial equality practices in a briefing to the Supreme Court in the Grutter v. Bollinger case (Kerby, 2012). If racial equality is good for some of the most successful businesses in this country, shouldn’t we consider that equality is good for the rest of us? When considering if Affirmative Action is still needed and legitimate, it is important not only to remember the past injustices suffered by groups of people, but also opportunities created for minorities and the advantages we all see from having a diverse environment surrounding us (Higginbotham, 2013). For all these reasons and so many more, I say that affirmative action and diversity inclusion is just as important today as it ever was. 

References:

Affirmative Action. (2013). American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved from        https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/affirmative-action

Brunner, B. (2007). Timeline of affirmative action milestones. Retrieved from                                            https://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmatrivetimeline1.html

Career Education Corporation (CEC) (2013). My Unique Student Experience. Retrieved from            https://class.aiuniv.edu/_layouts/MUSEViewer/MUSE.aspx?mid=MU16728

Higginbotham, F.M. (2013). Affirmative action still needed. Retrieved from            https://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-06-06/news/bs-ed-affirmative-action- 20130606_1_rejected-white-applicant-less-qualified-minority-applicants-grutter

Howe, A. (2013). Counting the votes: Today’s affirmative action argument, in Plain English.     Retrieved from https://www.scotusblog.com/2013/10/counting-the-votes-todays-        affirmative-action-argument-in-plain-english/

Kerby, S. (2012). 10 Reasons Affirmative Action STILL Matters Today. Retrieved from            https://www.alternet.org/10-reasons-affirmative-action-still-matters-today

McBride, A. (2007). Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978). Retrieved from            https://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_regents.html

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA REGENTS v. BAKKE, 438 U.S. 265 (1978). (2013). Find   Law.            Retrieved from           https://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=438&invol=265