1 / 6

Affirmative Action: Goals, Fairness, and Diversity

Explore the rationale behind affirmative action, including the need for procedural fairness, remedying past discrimination, and promoting diversity in society, education, and employment. Learn about key legal cases and arguments made by both proponents and opponents.

remedios-dudley
Download Presentation

Affirmative Action: Goals, Fairness, and Diversity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Civil Rights 10/8/07

  2. Proponents of Affirmative Action • Three goals • Need for procedural fairness • Need to remedy past discrimination • Need to promote diversity

  3. Procedural Fairness • Affirmative action is a protection for procedural fairness. • Kennedy 1961: Absent AA, there will be discrimination. • Discrimination: only in selection process.

  4. Past Discrimination • Affirmative action is a remedy for the history of discrimination. • Johnson 1965: “Scars of centuries” mean no fair competition. • Discrimination: evident in everything because of accumulated advantage and accumulated disadvantage.

  5. Diversity • Affirmative action promotes diversity. • Grutter v. Bollinger (2003): "a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body." • Discrimination?

  6. Opponents of AA • Reverse Discrimination • Bakke (1978): Upheld AA in principle but stated that rigid quota systems constitute reverse discrimination. • Gratz v. Bollinger (2003): applicants must receive “individualized consideration” • Central claims: reverse discrimination, special rights, unwarranted preferences • Discrimination: is individual and contained in the process, not systemic and contextualized in history.

More Related