Affirmative Action: Michigan´s Law that Bans Use of Racial Criteria in Admissions to Public Universities

The recent Supreme Court ruling is to support Michigan's law and to prohibit the use of racial standards in admission to public universities, which is raising concerns about the country's positive behaviors. It goes back to civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s, ethnic protest against historical inequality, ethnic separation of ethnic minorities and ethnic minorities. On May 17, 1954, Brown v. Board of Education in Topeka, Kansas reversed the separation and equality separation in 1896, as Pressy vs. Ferguson became a breakthrough event for the United States, the Supreme Court found that the school separation I judged it to be unconstitutional. In case of meaning

Recently, the main argument about positive behavior focuses on admission to public universities. In 2003, the Supreme Court made important decisions in two lawsuits including the University of Michigan. In Grutter v. Bollinger, the court ruled that elements such as race can be considered in the enrollment process, seems to set strict numerical targets for minority enrollment in the case of Gratz v. Bollinger affirmative We exclude action plans. As part of November 2006, Michigan voters endorsed a referendum prohibiting aggressive action on public education, contracts and employment. Obviously this is not the last sentence of this problem. Given the nature of controversial racial registration plans, it is certain that aggressive litigation will be brought again in the court in the near future.

In November, Michigan state voters approved a proposal to prohibit positive actions at university admissions. A similar ban was previously approved in California and Washington. Various student organizations against the ban are suing lawsuits; critics of positive behavior are seeking challenges in other countries. Aggressive behavior has always been a politically sensitive problem, but it is not the only problem to achieve equality in higher education. Given the legal problem of the Michigan state ban expanding in the courts and expanding to other states, this time is a good time to tackle another important and even more important issue.