200 lines
12 KiB
Plaintext
200 lines
12 KiB
Plaintext
ÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜ ÜÜÜ ÜÜÜÜ
|
|
ÜÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛßÛßßßßßÛÛÜ ÜÜßßßßÜÜÜÜ ÜÛÜ ÜÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÜÜÜÜÜÛßß ßÛÛ
|
|
ßÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÜ ßÛÛ ÜÛÛÛÜÛÛÜÜÜ ßÛÛÛÛÜ ßÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÜÛÛÜÜÜÛÛÝ Ûß
|
|
ßßßÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÜ ÞÝ ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛßßÛÜÞÛÛÛ ÛÛÛÛÛÜ ßßÛÛÛÞß
|
|
Mo.iMP ÜÛÛÜ ßÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÝÛ ÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛ ÞÛÛÛÛ ÞÛÛÛÛÛÝ ßÛß
|
|
ÜÛÛÛÛÛÛÛ ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÝ ÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÝ ÛÛÛ ÛÛÛÛÛÛ
|
|
ÜÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÝ ÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛ ÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛ ß ÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÜ ÜÛ
|
|
ÜÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÝ ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛ ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÝ ÞÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛß
|
|
ÜÛßÛÛÛÛÛÛ ÜÜ ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÝ ÛÛÞÛÛÛÛÛÝ ÞÛÛÛÛÛÛßß
|
|
ÜÛßÛÛÛÛÛÛÜÛÛÛÛÜÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛ ÞÛ ßÛÛÛÛÛ Ü ÛÝÛÛÛÛÛ Ü
|
|
ÜÛ ÞÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛß ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛ ßÛÜ ßÛÛÛÜÜ ÜÜÛÛÛß ÞÛ ÞÛÛÛÝ ÜÜÛÛ
|
|
ÛÛ ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛß ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÜ ßÛÜ ßßÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛß ÜÜÜß ÛÛÛÛÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÛÛÛÛÛß
|
|
ßÛÜ ÜÛÛÛß ßÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÜ ßßÜÜ ßßÜÛÛßß ßÛÛÜ ßßßÛßÛÛÛÛÛÛÛßß
|
|
ßßßßß ßßÛÛß ßßßßß ßßßßßßßßßßßßß
|
|
ARRoGANT CoURiERS WiTH ESSaYS
|
|
|
|
Grade Level: Type of Work Subject/Topic is on:
|
|
[ ]6-8 [ ]Class Notes [An Essay on Allan Bakke ]
|
|
[x]9-10 [ ]Cliff Notes [and his being a target ]
|
|
[ ]11-12 [x]Essay/Report [for reverse ]
|
|
[ ]College [ ]Misc [descrimination. ]
|
|
|
|
Dizzed: 06/94 # of Words:1438 School: ? State: ?
|
|
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ>ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ>ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ>Chop Here>ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ>ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ>ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ>ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
|
|
Table of Contents
|
|
Introduction and Background..............................1
|
|
The Issues and Arguments for each side...................2
|
|
The Opinions and Decisions of the Supreme Court..........4
|
|
My Personal Opinion and Arguments........................5
|
|
Relevance to Current Issues..............................6
|
|
Conclusion...............................................7
|
|
|
|
Introduction and Background
|
|
|
|
In 1973 a thirty-three year-old Caucasian male named Allan Bakke
|
|
applied to and was denied admission to the University of California Medical
|
|
School at Davis. In 1974 he filed another application and was once again
|
|
rejected, even though his t est scores were considerably higher than
|
|
various minorities that were admitted under a special program. This
|
|
special program specified that 16 out of 100 possible spaces for the
|
|
students in the medical program were set aside solely for minorities, w
|
|
hile the other 84 slots were for anyone who qualified, including
|
|
minorities.
|
|
|
|
What happened to Bakke is known as reverse discrimination. Bakke
|
|
felt his rejections to be violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the
|
|
14th amendment, so he took the University of California Regents to the
|
|
Superior Court of California. It was ruled that "the admissions program
|
|
violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th
|
|
Amendment"1 The clause reads as follows:
|
|
|
|
"...No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor without due process of the law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."2
|
|
The court ruled that race could not be a factor in admissions.
|
|
However, they did not force the admittance of Bakke because the court could
|
|
not know if he would have been admitted if the special admissions program
|
|
for minorities did not exist . Bakke disagreed with the court on this
|
|
issue and he brought it before the California Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
The California Supreme Court held that it was the University's
|
|
burden to prove that Bakke would not have been admitted if the special
|
|
program was not in effect. The school could not meet this requirement, and
|
|
Bakke was admitted by court orde r. However, the University appealed to
|
|
the Supreme Court for "certiorari", which was granted, and the order to
|
|
admit Bakke was suspended pending thCourt's decision.3 The Issues and
|
|
Arguments for Each Side
|
|
|
|
"Bakke was the most significant civil rights case to reach the
|
|
United States Supreme Court since Brown v. Board the Education of Topeka,
|
|
Kansas."4 The special admissions program at Davis tried to further
|
|
integrate the higher education system because merely removing the
|
|
barriers, as the Brown case did, did not always work. In short, Bakke was
|
|
questioning how far the University of California Medical School at Davis
|
|
could go the try to make up for past racial discrimination and segregatio
|
|
n.
|
|
|
|
The arguments for and against the special admissions program are
|
|
complicated. The arguments for special admissions are as follows: Because
|
|
of past injustices, compensation should be granted to minorities, and one
|
|
possible form is as affirma tive action, which, in this case, is the role
|
|
of the special admissions program. In addition, racial diversity in
|
|
educational institutions was seen as a plus. The diversity would teach
|
|
students more about different races and religions and prepare t hem for the
|
|
future when they would most likely have to work along side someone
|
|
different from themselves. Hopefully, minorities in professional areas
|
|
would return to their minority community and be seen as a role model for
|
|
minority youth while benef itting the entire community as well. The final
|
|
argument for the special admissions program is that advantage should not be
|
|
associated with race, i.e. because one is of the Caucasian majority he/she
|
|
should not have more advantages and likewise becaus e one is of a minority
|
|
he/she should not be disadvantaged.
|
|
|
|
The arguments against the special admissions program were based
|
|
upon the fact that the Constitution was intended to overlook race and
|
|
ethnicity in public authority and decisions. The fault in special
|
|
admissions programs is that they will us e skin color as a more important
|
|
factor than academic and personal merit. Thus, those who deserve
|
|
advancement may not receive it, due to affirmative action and the
|
|
associated reverse discrimination. By doing so, the various ethnic groups
|
|
will be di vided and possibly end up competing. Another problem with the
|
|
special admissions program is that it does not take into account the
|
|
disadvantaged who are in the majority, not the minority. And finally, it
|
|
is seen as charity to the minorities by many individuals and civil rights
|
|
groups. The Opinion of the Supreme Court
|
|
|
|
The decision of the Supreme Court was seen as "something for
|
|
everyone." In other words, each side, although not completely gaining
|
|
their ends, furthered their cause. The special admissions program at Davis
|
|
was deemed unconstitutional becaus e it specified a number of minority
|
|
slots. However, the court upheld the use of race or ethnicity as "a 'plus'
|
|
in a particular applicant's file, so long as it does not insulate the
|
|
individual from comparison with all other candidates for the availab le
|
|
seats."5
|
|
|
|
"Justice Powell was the key to the Bakke decision; In fact, it
|
|
could be said that he created both majorities in addition to merely
|
|
agreeing with them."6 The decision to do away with the Davis special
|
|
admissions quota system was supported by Powell, Chief Justice Burger,
|
|
Justice Rehnquist, Justice Potter Stewart, and Justice John Paul Stevens.
|
|
They saw the Bakke case as a dispute which could be settled by the 1964
|
|
Civil Rights Act without even calling constitutional matters into questi
|
|
on. "Title VI of the act, they pointed out, barred any discrimination on
|
|
the ground of race, color, or national origin in any program receiving
|
|
federal financial assistance."7 Therefore, the university had violated
|
|
that part of the 1964 Civil Right s Act.
|
|
|
|
However, Powell thought differently. Instead of ruling out
|
|
constitutional involvement, he saw the equal protection clause of the
|
|
Fourteenth Amendment and Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act as equal.
|
|
Therefore, he said, "what violated one violated the other.
|
|
|
|
"The Davis special admissions program used an explicit racial
|
|
classification, Powell noted. Such classifications were not always
|
|
unconstitutional, he continued, 'but when a state's distribution of
|
|
benefits or imposition of burdens hinges on. .. the color of a person's
|
|
skin or ancestry, that individual is entitled to demonstration that the
|
|
challenged classification is necessary to promote a substantial state
|
|
interest.' Powell could find no substantial interest that justified the
|
|
establis hment of the... quota system. Not even the desire to remedy past
|
|
discrimination was a sufficient justification, he said."8
|
|
|
|
Powell did not agree completely that all racial classifications
|
|
were unconstitutional. He did think that affirmative action, when it
|
|
considered race, was okay. He demonstrated this when he voted on this
|
|
point with Justices Brennan, Marshal, White, and Harry A. Blackmun.
|
|
|
|
After eight months, a vote of 5-4 decided that Bakke be admitted to
|
|
the medical school at Davis. The decision on the constitutional issue was
|
|
that a numerical quota was unconstitutional unless it was used to right a
|
|
previous discrimination. However, using race and religion as a plus in
|
|
educational admissions was deemed constitutional. My Personal Opinion and
|
|
Arguments
|
|
|
|
I agree partly with the ruling of the Supreme Court. The decision
|
|
that Bakke's Constitutional rights were violated I feel is correct.
|
|
However, if they were, than any quota based on race is unconstitutional
|
|
also. Whether or not there is an actual number for a quota, or just a
|
|
preference to admit someone of a non-Caucasian race to an educational
|
|
institution merely because of their race. This may curb someone's
|
|
opportunities just because they were white. This IS reverse
|
|
discrimination, and it should not be practiced. Race should NOT be
|
|
considered at all in any admissions program that is federally funded. By
|
|
trying to right past wrongs on minorities by incurring wrongs on the
|
|
majority today, it will start a cycle that will, in th e worst case, be
|
|
never ending. For example, if yesterday a Negro could not get into a
|
|
college because of discrimination, then today we'll let him in because we
|
|
want to try to right the wrong of yesterday. But in doing so, we must not
|
|
admit a white because he is white. And then tomorrow do we have to keep
|
|
out a black to let the white in? It is an endless cycle that is wrong and
|
|
unconstitutional. Race should be overlooked all together, and only
|
|
academic merit and community involvement should be considered in any
|
|
federally funded institution. Relevance to Current Issues
|
|
|
|
Affirmative action has recently become an issue in the Supreme
|
|
Court again. Because Clarence Thomas is replacing Thurgood Marshall, and
|
|
Thomas is against Affirmative Action, and Marshall was for it, the past
|
|
decision may be overturned. In a 1989 case it was ruled that the legacy of
|
|
discrimination was not enough to validate the use of hiring quotas.
|
|
|
|
This term, the Supreme Court will turn towards desegregation and
|
|
Affirmative Action. The Freeman v. Pitts case is another recent case
|
|
dealing with whether bussing is still needed to curb past discrimination.
|
|
Another case that the court has accepted for this term will examine whether
|
|
colleges should eliminate racial preference systems in admissions or
|
|
whether quotas are still needed to further curtail the use of affirmative
|
|
action. The name of this case and the specific facts, however, were
|
|
unavailable at this time.9
|
|
|
|
Obviously affirmative action and reverse discrimination are still
|
|
heavily debated issues. This is because they affect all people of all
|
|
races and ethnicities. Conclusion
|
|
|
|
Allan Bakke was denied his fourteenth amendment right to equal
|
|
protection of the laws. In addition the University of California at Davis
|
|
violated Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. By order of the Supreme
|
|
Court Bakke was admitted and th e numerical quotas of the special
|
|
admissions program were deemed unconstitutional. Justice was served to
|
|
Bakke, but future generations who are not minorities may be plagued by the
|
|
other half of the decision: That race may still be used as a "plus " on an
|
|
application.
|