Affirmative action

Affirmative action
Name	Affirmative action
Status	Ongoing

Affirmative action is a set of policies and practices designed to increase representation of historically disadvantaged groups in United States civil service employment, higher education, and private sector organizations by considering membership in targeted groups during selection processes; proponents cite remedies for historical discrimination exemplified by measures after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, while opponents invoke legal challenges like Regents of the University of California v. Bakke and decisions such as Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The topic intersects with landmark figures and institutions including Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Thurgood Marshall, and agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights.

History

Origins trace to executive and legislative actions in the United States, notably Executive Order 10925 under John F. Kennedy and subsequent orders by Lyndon B. Johnson connected to the Civil Rights Movement, alongside judicial developments including Brown v. Board of Education and later rulings like Regents of the University of California v. Bakke and Grutter v. Bollinger. Parallel measures emerged in other jurisdictions after decolonization and during postwar reconstruction, involving actors such as the United Kingdom, India, South Africa, and institutions like the Indian National Congress and the African National Congress. Historical episodes intersect with legislation like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and national plans including affirmative programs in the United Kingdom under various cabinets, and policies following transitions in countries such as Brazil and Malaysia.

Legal framework and policy implementation

Legal frameworks rely on constitutions, statutes, executive orders, and judicial precedents: in the United States key cases include Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Grutter v. Bollinger, Gratz v. Bollinger, and Fisher v. University of Texas; administrative agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the U.S. Department of Labor enforce employment measures. Other jurisdictions implement constitutional provisions and specific laws—examples include provisions in the Constitution of India, the Employment Equity Act in South Africa, affirmative measures under the Equality Act 2010 in the United Kingdom, and quota systems codified in legislation in Brazil and Malaysia. International bodies such as the United Nations and the European Court of Human Rights press norms through instruments like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and advisory opinions affecting national policy.

Goals and rationales

Proponents justify measures with legal remedies for past discrimination established in precedents like Brown v. Board of Education and policy goals echoed by leaders including Lyndon B. Johnson and Martin Luther King Jr.: remedying structural exclusion in institutions such as Harvard University, University of California, Princeton University, and employers like General Electric or Ford Motor Company; promoting diversity as argued in cases like Grutter v. Bollinger; and addressing socio-economic disparities highlighted by agencies like the U.S. Census Bureau and reports from organizations such as the World Bank. Goals also include representation in political bodies exemplified by reforms in parliaments of India and legislative measures affecting South Africa.

Methods and practices

Methods range from numerical quotas in systems like those historically used in India and Brazil, to race-conscious admissions at institutions such as Harvard University and University of Texas at Austin, to targeted outreach programs used by corporations like IBM and Microsoft and public employers overseen by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Practices include use of holistic review in higher education as seen at University of Michigan and Yale University, set-asides in contracting used by municipal governments like New York City and Los Angeles, and preferential hiring policies within agencies such as the U.S. Postal Service and National Institutes of Health. Compliance mechanisms involve audits by bodies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and monitoring by ministries analogous to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (India).

Controversies and criticisms

Critiques arise from legal challenges such as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Grutter v. Bollinger, Fisher v. University of Texas, and Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College; political opposition from figures and parties including Conservative Party (UK), Republican Party, and court interventions like decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States. Critics cite claims of reverse discrimination raised in cases involving institutions such as Michigan State University and corporations like Walmart; debates also involve economists and social scientists represented by authors at institutions like Harvard University, Stanford University, and think tanks such as the Cato Institute and Brookings Institution. Additional controversies concern implementation failures noted in municipal scandals (e.g., contracting disputes in New York City), political backlash in countries such as Malaysia and Brazil, and competing frameworks advanced by international bodies like the United Nations.

Impact and outcomes

Empirical assessments reference research from universities and agencies including Harvard University, Stanford University, University of California, Berkeley, the U.S. Census Bureau, and policy institutes like the National Bureau of Economic Research and Brookings Institution examining effects on enrollment at institutions such as Harvard University, University of Michigan, and University of Texas, labor-force participation at companies like General Electric and IBM, and income mobility studies involving data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Outcomes reported include increased representation in professional schools and public-sector employment, contested effects on academic performance and workplace cohesion studied by scholars at Columbia University and Princeton University, and long-term labor-market impacts analyzed by researchers at the National Bureau of Economic Research and American Enterprise Institute.

International perspectives and comparisons

Comparative approaches appear across nations: constitutional and statutory quota systems in India and Brazil contrast with affirmative measures enforced via equality laws in the United Kingdom and case law in the United States; transitional justice and redistribution policies in South Africa link to instruments adopted after the end of apartheid by the African National Congress and codified in the Employment Equity Act; Southeast Asian models in Malaysia and Indonesia involve ethnically targeted economic programs tied to ruling parties like United Malays National Organisation. International organizations—the United Nations, the World Bank, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development—provide comparative analyses and guidance influencing reforms in countries from Canada to Australia to South Africa.

Category:Public policy