Friday, March 9, 2012
Affirmative Action case reaching the Supreme Court
Affirmative action refers to policies that take factors including "race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or national origin"into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group, usually justified as countering the effects of a history of discrimination. It is a practice that has been used in areas such as employment and Universities' admission practices. However it benefits minorities, its constitutionality has been questioned in the past by applicants that don't belong to these groups. Groups against Affirmative Actions state that it contradicts its purpose creating more discrimination. On the other hand supporters see it as a big opportunity for minorities to have access to the schools that were once predominantly white. The first case decided by the Supreme Court deciding this issue was back in 1979, California v. Bakke. In this case an applicant to medical school was denied admission because of a special program that secured 16 of the 100 seats to the entering class. The majority of the justices agreed that he shouldn't have been denied admission. Thurgood Marshall the only black justice in the panel wrote a very powerful dissenting opinion. History is trying to repete itself this time with justice Sotomayor in the Supreme Court; Fisher v. Texas is schedule to be heard in fall by the Supreme Court. Sotomayor has expressed her positive views about Affirmative Action, however it is expected that the majority of the justice will rule against this practice. Either writing the majority , concurring or discenting opinion; justice Sotomayor is expecting to bring some controversy to this case. I really hope she makes history like Justice Thurgood Marshall... I'm a big fan of her !!!!
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/07/opinion/navarrette-affirmative-action/index.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm an opponent of affirmative action, not because I oppose minorities (even then, I dislike this term minority, for what really determines a minority; in some places of CA, Caucasians are a minority) entering schools or anything like that, but because, like you mentioned in you article, it seeks to rid the country of discrimination by discriminating against certain races, genders, age groups, religions, national origins, etc. in favor of other races, genders, age groups, religions, etc.
ReplyDeleteI also oppose affirmative action because it cannot lawfully happen in public schools; public schools are run by the people through their state governments, essentially, and government is not allowed to discriminate based on race, gender, age, etc. in any other way, especially the benefits it gives out, the laws it passes, or the hiring process in the public sector. So why are we allowing government to do so in the schools, discriminating in favor of certain minorities (again, a term I dislike) when it can't and shouldn't discriminate in any other way?
In private schools, given the nature of private property, some amount of discrimination is approved by law and is appropriate. But in public schools, this cannot and should not be happening, yet it does through affirmative action. Contradiction through the laws, both federal and state? I think so.
I think this is a hard one, because the middle class is now the lower class and it does not distinguish between race or orientation.
ReplyDeleteI think all should have an opportunity for higher education, but that should be with paying for school, not getting priority to get into schools.
I'm not sure if we need affirmative action anymore. I wonder if it's served it's purpose and is kind of archaic now. Controversial, I know.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, I love her! I can't wait to see the milestones she will make starting with this case of Affirmative Action.
ReplyDelete