Action Alert: Affirmative Action and Education
March 2003
From: UNITED METHODIST WOMEN’S ACTION NETWORK
Women’s Division – General Board of Global Ministries
100 Maryland Avenue, NE Suite 530 – Washington, DC 20002
Tel. (202) 488-5660 * Fax (202) 488-5681

 

The United States has a troubled history with race relations that are growing more complex with the country’s increasing racial and ethnic diversity. The Supreme Court will hear two cases in April 2003 that will potentially have a significant impact on the future of affirmative action in the United States. The Columbia University Electronic Encyclopedia defines affirmative action as “government programs to overcome the effects of past societal discrimination by allocating jobs and resources to members of specific groups, such as minorities and women. This examination highlights affirmative action as it has been applied to education.

The two cases before the court involve the University of Michigan’s admission policies for its undergraduate program and law school. The plaintiffs in the two cases, Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger, were denied admission to the University of Michigan and their lawsuit “…claims that the University’s affirmative action policy unlawfully discriminated against white applicants by giving consideration to race and ethnicity in making admission decisions, and thus admitting minority applicants that were deemed less qualified.” The University’s argument is that their policy is compliant with the Bakke decision.

In the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case known as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bakke by deciding that the use of racial quotas in admission policies by colleges was unconstitutional. Often quotas are incorrectly equated with affirmative action. Quotas are defined as a fixed number of spots for employment and education reserved for minorities and women. In 1978, Allan Bakke, a white applicant, filed a lawsuit against the University of California Davis medical school because he was denied admission while minorities with lower GPA and MCAT scores were admitted. The Supreme Court’s decision did allow colleges to consider race as a factor in admissions because diversity in education is a compelling state interest, but race could not be the only determining factor. In his decision, Justice Powell wrote, “the diversity that furthers a compelling state interest encompasses a far broader array of qualifications and characteristics of which ethnic origin is but a single though important element.” According to the University of Michigan, its chief objective is to educate their students to comprehend and appreciate the similarities and difference that make up American Society. The University tries to attain this goal by having a diverse student body. The University states that race is one of the factors they use to consider admission, but like the decision in the Bakke case, it is one of the factors out of many.

In the early 1960’s courts were dealing with the issue of racial segregation in public schools. Using the justification of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, courts ordered local school boards to desegregate their schools. This process of desegregation would last two decades. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 provided the legal framework for affirmative action in education and employment and prohibits racial or ethnic discrimination in all federally assisted programs and activities, including public or private educational institutions.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was interpreted by the Department of Education “to require schools and colleges to take affirmative action to overcome the effects of past discrimination and to encourage voluntary affirmative action to attain a diverse student body.” In response, universities from around the country began adopting admission policies that would encourage a diverse student body, since federal funding was not given to any institution that would discriminate.

The term affirmative action was first used by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 in an Executive Order which established the Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity. In the Executive Order, federal contractors were instructed to take “affirmative action to ensure that applicants are equally treated without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” On June 4, 1965, in a speech he gave at Howard University, President Johnson stated that civil rights alone are not enough to remedy discrimination. President Johnson issued an Executive Order that same year which required government contractors to “take affirmative action” toward prospective minority employees in all aspects of hiring and employment. The Executive Order was amended in 1967 to also include discrimination on the basis of gender.

In 1995, the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit (Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana), in the case of Hopwood v. Texas, ended all considerations of race in recruitment, admissions and scholarships in all public institutions in Texas. While governor of Texas, President Bush created an “affirmative access” program. Under this program, admission was guaranteed to state colleges for the top 10% of each high school graduating class, regardless of race.

People of color and women have made substantial gains in higher education and employment as a direct result of affirmative action. With the recent submission of over 66 legal briefs to the Supreme Court in support of the University of Michigan, diverse members of U.S. society have vocally affirmed their support for affirmative action. These briefs represent over 300 organizations and interest groups, including Fortune 500 companies, academics, medical professionals, and members of the military and defense establishment.

Colleges and universities look at various factors when deciding which students to admit. These include: high school or college grades and rank, standardized test scores, letters of recommendation, essays, alumni connection, extra-curricular activities, geography, socio-economic status and race and ethnicity. While race and ethnicity are the criteria most often signaled out for criticism, public debate rarely discusses how other groups benefit from other types of admissions preferences. Colleges and universities across the country, among them the most prestigious in the nation, have demonstrated their commitment to affirmative action through programs that seek to expand opportunities for underrepresented groups.

In 1996, the voters of California passed Proposition 209 which abolished all affirmative action programs in the state in employment, education and contracting. In conjunction, the Regents of the University of California adopted a new system for admitting students known as the “Comprehensive Review.” Under the Comprehensive Review, a potential student would be evaluated not only on the basis of academics, but also on extracurricular activities and life challenges since race and ethnicity could no longer be a determining factor in admissions. The University also guaranteed admission to the top 4% of high school students in the state. Although the number of applicants from minorities grew, access to the schools remained stable.

Since affirmative action programs were banned in California and Texas the number of minority students enrolled in universities has declined even further. Many groups such as, the Harvard University Civil Rights Project, Americans for a Fair Chance, the ACLU, and American Association of Affirmative Action, believe that affirmative action programs remain to be the only effective solution for achieving racially and ethnically diverse universities. “A racially and ethnically diverse university student body has far-ranging and significant benefits for all students, Non-minorities and minorities alike. Students learn better in such an environment and are better prepared to become active participants in our pluralistic, democratic society once they leave school.”

Since 1961, affirmative action has been evolving. Educational institutions and the private sector have been developing policies and using proactive outreach to increase the number of women and minorities in their institutions. In some cases these policies have been successful, in others they have led to legal cases where affirmative action was challenged. Today affirmative action is being challenged once again with the University of Michigan cases. The effects of the rulings in these cases will be felt far beyond university campuses and federal offices. The Supreme Court’s decisions will reflect the state of racial justice in the U.S. today, and the results of these cases will reach every corner of American life, from classrooms to boardrooms to emergency rooms, to the heart of our communities.

ACTION

 

---