Supreme Court and Affirmative Action

Positive behaviors are subject to wide debate for a while. It has been used as a tool to discriminate against discrimination in many fields such as workplace, education, government, etc. Some people think that the use of positive behavior is inherently discriminatory. What the US Supreme Court is currently dealing with this case is "Schuette v. Protection Positive Action Alliance ...". This lawsuit was created more than eight years ago from the proposal introduced in Michigan in 2006.

Positive litigation is subject to numerous lawsuits and has been questioned by the constitutional legality. In 2003, the Supreme Court decision on aggressive behavior in higher education (Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 US 244 - Supreme Court 2003) acknowledged that educational institutions consider race as a factor in registering students It was. Or, some universities often do not use economic standards much, and there are things that attract a racial group that is generally low in standard of living. In some states such as California Civil Rights Initiative, Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, and Washington State (Initiative 200), a constitutional amendment prohibiting public institutions including public schools from conducting in each state It adopted. It is a positive action. Conservative activists stated that the university quietly used illegal quotas to increase the number of ethnic minorities and caused numerous lawsuits to deter them.

Gratz and Grutter confirmed and completed the position of a positive lawsuit by the Supreme Court four and a half years after the first decision of the University of California, vs Bakke University (1978). The court says that if the positive action plan treats race as a factor of individual evaluation and only aims to achieve the goal of "class diversity", the positive action plan is only a constitutional one Made a statement. However, with the addition of two new judges to the Supreme Court in 2006, this practice will soon become tolerant.