Affirmative Action: Schuette v. Coalition
Elvida Velic, Kailyn Cano, Karolina Guerrero, Emanuel Lopez, Johan Gonzalez
English 101, Professor Grewe and LLS 100 FYS-41, Professor Lisandro Perez
What is Affirmative Action?
Affirmative Action is the policy of favoring
members of a disadvantaged group who are
perceived to suffer from discrimination within a
culture. The term “Affirmative Action” was first
mentioned in 1961 by John F. Kennedy as a
method of redressing discrimination that had
continued even after enforcement of civil rights
laws. It was enacted and enforced by Lyndon
Johnson to get to the next stage of the battle for
civil rights. It was used to “level the playing field,”
ensuring that African-Americans and other
minorities had the same benefits most white
Americans had access to. This generally focused
on education and job opportunities. Flaws and
problems in the policy arose during the late
1970s; however, it became a subject of
controversy after a white male was rejected from
a medical school that accepted less-qualified
minorities. Causing an uproar and backlash for
Affirmative Action, it provided an example of
“reverse racism.” Affirmative Action is still hotly
debated to this day.
History:
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003): Barbara Grutter, a female
Michigan resident with a 3.8 GPA and 161 LSAT
score, filed a lawsuit to the University of Michigan
when they denied her admission. She alleged that
she was discriminated on basis of race by the
respondents. The defendant, Bollinger (President of
the University of Michigan), stated that the school
promotes this policy because of their interest in
diversity. The court upheld the university’s admission
policy.
- Gratz v. Bollinger (June 2003): Gratz and
Hamacher, both white residents in Michigan, were
denied admission to the University of Michigan.
They filed a lawsuit against the University of
Michigan, alleging that it violated the 14th
Amendment since
the university granted an extra 20 points to
Hispanics, African-Americans, and Native
Americans. With a 6-3 majority, the Court ruled that
the act of contributing to certain applicants was
unconstitutional.
- Schuette v. Coalition (2013- 2014): challenges the
state of Michigan to ban race-conscious admissions
and create a non-discriminatory system of choosing
school admission criteria. In a 6-2 decision,
Michigan is prohibited to consider race as a part of
the admission process.
Does an amendment to a state’s constitution to prohibit race- and sex-based
discrimination and preferential treatment in public university admission decisions
violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s
Dissent
Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s blistering dissent on
Affirmative Action showed how she and Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg disagreed with the University of
Michigan case, and how Affirmative Action being
banned would affect thousands of minority groups and
their admission to the university. Justice Sotomayor
starts off very strong because, even in the fifth of 58
pages of her opposing dissent, she states, “It would
be demeaning to the democratic process, the plurality
concludes, to disturb that decision in any way. This
logic embraces majority rule without an important
constitutional limit.” She makes this argument
because she wants to guarantee equal protection of
the laws for all and equal participation of selfgovernment. She then states in multiple sections the
different court cases that have dealt with the minority
group, African Americans, whom were suppressed
heavily both out in the open and discreetly, with
different tactics being used in both fields.
Majority:
Consequences of the Court’s
Decision in Schuette v. Coalition
Within the past couple of years, it became evident that
those who were not minorities were affected by the
university's admission process. The banning of Affirmative
Action reversed this statement. The enrollment of Hispanics
and African-Americans have decreased. Minorities are
greatly affected by this because they are discouraged. An
increase in dropout rates of minorities is another
consequence. Many of those considered a minority will most
likely not go further than high school which has a great
effect on their career ambitions. Minorities will feel
intimidated or not worthy because of rejection causing them
to lose hope and not move on to higher education. The
banning of Affirmative Action also shows that lower
academic standards decreases both academic performance
and grades. The graph above presents a drop in enrollment
of the minorities on campus while the banning of Affirmative
Action is in effect. The graph on the right represents the
college readiness by race. It is evident that the minorities
are low in percentages, discouraging them to aim higher.
With a majority of 6-2, Affirmative Action has been banned
in the state of Michigan since April 22, 2014. Chief Justice
Roberts, Justice Kennedy, Justice Alito, Justice Scalia,
Justice Thomas, and Justice Breyer were the majority that
voted in this decision. Chief Justice Roberts' concurring
opinion was that having racial preferences will cause more
racial recognition which will do more harm than good. Equal
treatment under the law is more important than the efforts
of diversifying a school.
References:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/12-682
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Schuette_v._Coalition_to_Defend_Affirmative_Action
https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/schuette-v-coalitiondefend-affirmative-action
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/thesad-irony-of-affirmative-action
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmative1.html
http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/affirmativeaction-overview.aspx
http://dailynexus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/
Sandra_Courtesy_US-Department-of-Justice.jpg
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.
608054785502347859&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&r
s=0&p=0