(4) Affirmative Action

Civil Rights Act L B J
1. AA has it roots in the 1964 Civil Rights Act (LBJ)
2. 70% approval at the time
3. In the act it became illegal to segregate on the grounds of race
4. It also became illegal to discriminate against employees on the grounds of race (e.g. not hiring someone because they were African-American).
5. Hubert H Humphrey: “there is nothing in [Title VII] that will give power to the Commission to require hiring, firing, and promotion to meet a racial ‘quota.’ [. . .] Title VII is designed to encourage the hiring on basis of ability and qualifications, not race or religion.”
Under Nixon
1. “Philadelphia Order” Nixon Administration
  1. Required government contractors in Philadelphia to hire minority workers, it was quicker extended to other cities
2. “We would not impose quotas, but would require federal contractors to show 'affirmative action' to meet the goals of increasing minority employment.” – Nixon
Affirmative action examples
1. 1971 – Griggs v. Duke Power Company
  1. Griggs V. Duke Power Company was a court case in December of 1970 and was ruled in favour of the prosecutor in March 1971.
  2. The case was arguing that Duke’s requirement of a high school diploma and an IQ test was discriminating against African-Americans.
  3. It was found that Whites that had been working the jobs who fulfilled neither requirement did it just as well as those who did.
  4. The Supreme Court ruled that under title VII of the Civil Rights Act that if the requirements were impeding minorities, the business had to demonstrate that the tests were necessary for the job.
  5. They ruled that these tests were not necessary, and Duke was found in violation of the Act.
2. 2003 - Hopwood Vs Texas
  1. Started in 1992. Cheryl Hopwood attempted to sue University of Texas Lawschool for not recruiting her as a student.
  2. She claimed that she had been discriminated against because she was more qualified than most of the students who were recruited
  3. But she was white Originally the case ruled in favour of Hopwood. It became illegal for Texas. To use race as a factor in recruiting students
  4. However in 2003 the decision was overuled and so now in Texas race can now be used to decide on admission to colleges.
  5. "does not prohibit the law school's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.“ Supreme court 2003
  6. The Hopwood case has implications for affirmative action:
    1. It redefined the purpose of affirmative action from:
      1. Benefiting those who historically had been discriminated against
    2. To:
      1. Improving the diversity of institutions
Clinton’s Affirmative Action Review 1998
1. “Let me be clear about what affirmative action must not mean and what I won’t allow it to be. It does not mean – and I don’t favor – the unjustified preference of the unqualified over the qualified of any race or gender. It doesn’t mean – and I don’t favor – numerical quotas. It doesn’t mean – and I don’t favor – rejection or selection of any employee or student solely on the basis of race or gender without regard to merit…”
The Cases For Racial Admissions
What was the purpose of afirmative action when it was introduced in the 1960s
1. To address the consequences of political polices that had actively denied opportunity to generations of racial minorities
Conservatives against affirmative action
1. The USA is highly competitive there are winners and losers
  1. It provides incentives for people to achieve
  2. Under meritocracy
2. Past dicrimination not main reason - is is put down to lifestyle choices (drugs alcohol) in minority communities
What solutions do conservatives suggest to racial inequality
1. Abolition of welfare that serves as disincentives to self-reliance, including affirmative action.
2. This would allow people to make the most of their own abilites and the opportunities offered by a vibrant free-market economy
3. The Republic party support this, partical radical right-wing Tea Party movement
Moderates' views about affirmative action
1. No longer needed - significant minority groups have benefited over the past 40 years
2. They call for it to be reformed
  1. School and cultural reform - Texas 10% rule (top 10% of all highschool grads get university payments
3. Democratic party Support a need for poverty relief and racial anti-discrimination policies
Left-wing view of affirmative action
1. It provids practical opportunities that have long been denied because of slavery and segregation
2. It can bring further benefits, like increasing the number of people who are fully participating in society
3. The Black community need government assistance due to it typical having limited resources
4. Political authorities have a responsibilty to provide resources in deprived districts for a high-quality, rounded, curriculum
What do radicals mean by "corrective justice"
1. Genuine fairness can only be achieved when compensation is payed
  1. Payment for the accumulated effects of over 200 years of lost liberty and opportunity
2. This would proved Black with the resources to implement solutions to problems unique to their communities
Counter-arguments of both sides
1. Defenders of affirmative action
  1. Opponents down-play the impact of radical discrimination over a 200 year period by making comparisons with other groups that have never suffered "hatred and injustice"
    1. (White are being discriminated against)
  2. Moderates opponents of affirmative action want to intro a new welfare programme, but would they remain commited to their alternative form of affirmative action.
  3. Opponents primarily motived by racism
2. Critics of affirmative action
  1. They object to an approach an approach that they see as undermining the features of American society - open competition and limited government

Media attachments

3abe26b8-c487-47b9-b930-34303a9bcc76 (image/png)

Next up

(4) Affirmative Action

Description

Resource summary

Media attachments

Similar

	Created by Marcus Danvers almost 11 years ago