# data[].attributes.headline
Affirmative Action and Institutional Racism

# data[].attributes.subject
Affirmative Action and Institutional Racism

# data[].attributes.body
Modern institutional racism involves systemic policies and practices that create and maintain racial inequalities within organizations and systems, such as education, employment, and the criminal justice system. Unlike individual racism, it's embedded in the normal operations of institutions, affecting areas like admissions, hiring, and housing.

# data[].attributes.headline
Combating Modern Institutional Discrimination Through These Cases

# data[].attributes.subject
Combating Modern Institutional Discrimination Through These Cases

# data[].attributes.body
Promoting Diversity: Recognizing that diverse educational environments benefit all students and society by fostering understanding and reducing biases.

﻿﻿Guiding Policy Implementation:

Providing legal guidelines for institutions to design affirmative action policies that comply with constitutional standards.

Setting Precedents: Establishing judicial precedents that influence future affirmative action policies and practices across various sectors.

# data[].attributes.headline
Regents of the University of California v.
Bakke (1978):

# data[].attributes.subject
Regents of the University of California v.
Bakke (1978):

# data[].attributes.body
﻿﻿Background: White applicant Allan Bakke was denied admission to the University of California Medical School, arguing that the school's affirmative action policy was discriminatory.

﻿﻿Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that while affirmative action is permissible,

strict racial quotas are unconstitutional.

Bakke was admitted.

Impact: Established that race can be considered as one factor in admissions but

cannot be the sole determining factor.

# data[].attributes.body
﻿﻿Background: White applicant Barbara

Grutter was denied admission to the University of Michigan Law School, challenging the school's affirmative action policy.

﻿﻿Decision: The Court upheld the law school's affirmative action policy, stating that achieving a diverse student body is a compelling interest that can justify the use of race in admissions.

Impact: Reinforced the constitutionality of affirmative action in higher education aimed at creating diverse environments.

# data[].attributes.body
After Grutter v. Bollinger, many universities strengthened their diversity initiatives, ensuring that race is considered as part of a holistic admissions process.

Legal cases on affirmative action serve as tools to dismantle institutional discrimination by enforcing policies that promote diversity and equality.

# data[].attributes.headline
 Changing Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action

# data[].attributes.subject
 Changing Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action

# data[].attributes.body
Increasing Legal Scrutiny: Recent

Supreme Court cases, such as Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023), challenge the extent to which race can be considered in admissions, reflecting growing skepticism.

Public Opinion Shifts: Surveys indicate a nuanced view where some support affirmative action for leveling the playing field, while others oppose it on grounds of reverse discrimination.

Policy Adjustments: States like California and Michigan have banned race-based affirmative action in public university admissions, signaling a move away from traditional affirmative measures.

# data[].attributes.body
California's Proposition 209, passed in 1996, prohibits state institutions from considering race in public

employment, education, and contracting, reflecting a significant policy shift.

Attitudes toward affirmative action are becoming more critical and varied, with increasing challenges to its implementation and perceived fairness.

# data[].attributes.body
Enduring Belief in Diversity Benefits:

Many educators and students continue to value the diverse perspectives that affirmative action fosters in academic settings.

Ongoing Inequalities: Persistent racial disparities in education and employment sustain support for affirmative action as a necessary tool for equity.

Legal Protections: Supreme Court decisions like Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) and Grutter v. Bollinger have provided strong legal backing for affirmative action, making it resilient against opposition.

# data[].attributes.body
Despite bans in some states, institutions like Harvard University maintain their affirmative action policies, arguing that they are essential for creating a diverse and inclusive environment.

Support for affirmative action persists in many sectors due to the continued recognition of its role in addressing systemic inequalities and fostering diversity.

# data[].attributes.body
Affirmative action remains a vital and contentious tool in combating modern institutional racism. Legal cases have both shaped and reflected the evolving attitudes towards these policies, highlighting the ongoing struggle to balance equality and diversity in society.