History[ edit ] This section may be confusing or unclear to readers. In particular, it contains a very long narrative account without clear organization.
Affirmative action in university admissions: The ruling follows up on Fisher v. The plaintiff in the case was Abigail Fisher, a white student who was denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin in Those who do not meet this qualification are admitted based on factors such as academic achievement, extracurricular activities, cultural background and race.
Fisher, who was part of the second group, believed that she was denied admission because of her race, claiming that several of her non-white high school classmates were admitted despite having lower grades.
University of Texas in and ruled in favor of the university, as did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in In February the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and oral arguments took place in October The ruling in the case would technically only apply to public universities; but if the Court had ruled that affirmative action programs constitute racial discrimination, private universities would likely also be forbidden from using race in admission under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act ofwhich forbids racial discrimination in all programs that receive federal funding.
The case is only the latest wrinkle in a decades-old legal battle: In the case University of California Regents v. Bakkethe U. Supreme Court ruled that some affirmative action admissions programs were constitutional, but that race-based quotas were not.
In a famous pair of cases in — Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. In two cases, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. But even if institutions of higher education only used family income, not race, as their chief criterion for diversity, many structural challenges would remain.
High school students from low-income families of all races are less likely to apply to universities. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper, February We first discuss the conditions under which affirmative action for under-represented minorities URM could help or harm their educational outcomes.
We then provide descriptive evidence on the extent of affirmative action in law schools, as well as a review of the contentious literature on how affirmative action affects URM student performance in law school.
We present a simple selection model that we argue provides a useful framework for interpreting the disparate findings in this literature. The paper then turns to a similar discussion of affirmative action in undergraduate admissions, focusing on evidence of the extent of race-based admissions practices and the effect such preferences have on the quality of schools in which minority students enroll, graduation rates, college major and earnings.
We pay much attention to the evidence from state-level bans on affirmative action and argue these bans are very informative about how affirmative action affects URM students.
National Bureau of Economic Research working paper, July The goal of this paper is to show the clarifying power of economic reasoning to dispel some myths and misconceptions in the racial affirmative action debates. We enumerate seven commonly held but mistaken views one often encounters in the folklore about affirmative action affirmative action may involve goals and timelines, but definitely not quotas, e.
Simple economic arguments reveal these seven views to be more myth than fact. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, United States, the Supreme Court Weber, the Supreme Court holds that private sector employers and unions may lawfully implement voluntary affirmative action plans to remedy past discrimination.
The Court holds that an employer and union do not violate a collectively bargained plan by reserving 50 percent of the slots in a training program.
In October , the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Proposition 2 and in April ruled in a decision that voters may prohibit affirmative action in public universitites, thus overturning the lower court's decision and upholding Proposition 2.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (See attached Affirmative Action Plan Analysis Worksheet) evaluating the positive impact, as well as the adverse impact in the areas of outreach and recruitment, selection, employment, and training.
Thus, the law was plombier-nemours.com Croson is a perfectly typical example of unconstitutional affirmative action, affirmative action is perhaps most often debated in the context of schools and plombier-nemours.com foundational case dealing with affirmative action in schools is Regents of the University of California v.
Opposition to affirmative action in California culminated in the passage in of the California Civil Rights Initiative (Proposition ), which prohibited all government agencies and institutions from giving preferential treatment to individuals on the basis of their race or sex.
The Supreme Court effectively upheld the constitutionality of Proposition in November by refusing to hear a challenge to its . - Affirmative Action in the United States Affirmative Action in the United States consists of the active efforts that take into account race, sex and national origin for the purpose of .