and when i tried to coax you out, you wouldn't make a sound

Dear Diane,

Affirmative action feels so immediate and relevant in a way the Voting Rights Act did not because it applied to a very recent period in our life we dare not recollect: college admissions (I just shuddered). Naturally, affirmative action applies to many aspects of American society today, most notably the work force, but its application in education is what generates much of the debate… and where it can potentially have the greatest impact as it was originally intended.

I'm going to try to answer at a few questions in this post, specifically regarding affirmative action in education:

1. What is the original intent of affirmative action?
2. How has affirmative action been conducted and received historically?
3.  What are the positives of having affirmative action and the negatives of outlawing it from colleges?
4. What are the negatives of having affirmative action?

What is the original intent of affirmative action?

This is definitely a loaded question, because the answer comes in many parts: 1) it was established in the '60s to combat the persistent discrimination suffered by African-Americans and 2) to ensure public institutions, such as universities, hospitals and police forces, are more representative of the populations they serve. At least, this is Wikipedia's answer.  

But then what is the original intent of affirmative action in education? It certainly goes beyond compensating for past and continued discrimination. I like U of Michigan's interpretation best:

"Diversity itself has been defended as a dimension of merit--that is, being able to bring to the educational environment various perspective shaped by having lived in substantially different circumstances from the majority of students constitutes part of students' merit for admissions purposes."

I believe this defense of affirmative action in education holds fast even to this day, giving college admissions officers a very abstract interpretation of how affirmative action plays into the enrollment of freshmen students. I imagine admissions officers as minor gods, given free reign to conjure a microcosm -- which is what a college campus is, besides being a very intelligent and informed microcosm (which is by no means a representation of the real world). But it's very easy to get hung up on their vision of an ideal student population - e.g. at least 10 students must be musical prodigies, at least 1 must play the ukulele, 5 qualified for the 2012 London Olympics, 25 made a 2400 on the SATs and on and on. But these qualities are consequence of hard work and perhaps a little divine intervention… nobody has control of what their skin color is or who their parents are. If we acknowledge this unfairness upon enacting affirmative action, we must also acknowledge the advantage legacies have when applying to universities. I'll go further into that later.

How has affirmative action been conducted and received historically?

Case	Who / What	Ruling	Commentary
Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978)	33-year-old Allan Bakke applicant to University of California in Davis Medical School; he was rejected twice and filed against the school, alleging the admissions program excluded him due to his race, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment	No clear-cut majority with a 5-4 split in which the majority agreed UC Davis's admissions program was unconstitutional. UC Davis admitted Bakke.	The admission process at UC Davis set aside 16 of the 100 seats for student who were African-American, Chicano, Asian, Native American, or members of other ethnic minorities (and established a separate admissions process for these 16 spaces).
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)	Barbara Grutter (white) was rejected from U of Michigan Law School and filed a suit against the school for discriminating against her race.	5-4 decision ruled the race-conscious admissions process may favor minorities but ruled U Michigan Law's compelling interest in promoting class diversity was constitutional.	This was the first time the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case about affirmative action since Bakke. They cited the case during this trial.
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)	Jennifer Gratz and Peter Hamacher (both white) applied to the University of Michigan in 1995 and was rejected. She was later commissioned by the Center of Individual Rights to file against the university. (Bollinger was university president during when Hamacher's application was under consideration.	6-3 decision ruled U of Michigan's point admission's system "ensures that the diversity contributions of applicants cannot be individually assessed" and was therefore unconstitutional.	U of M used a 150-point system (100/150 points needed to guarantee admissions). 20 points were automatically granted to African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans. This point system was deemed far too mechanical by the Supreme Court. (also: Bollinger musta been on stressed out muthaf---)
Fisher v. University of Texas (2013)	Undergrad Abigail Fisher applied to University of Texas in Austin but was rejected. She filed against the university, alleging she was discriminated on the basis of their race in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.	Inconclusive: a 7-1 decision to send the case back to the lower courts to reconsider the standard they use to judge the fairness of UT Austin.	While the Supreme Court's approach to affirmative action in education has not changed, the court states that public institutions must have  a good reason for their methods in achieving the goal of racial diversity. Justice Kennedy: colleges and universities must demonstrate that "available, workable race-neutral alternatives do not suffice" before taking account race in admissions decisions.

Given my state of exhaustion (the puppy is srsly depriving me of all sleep TTTTT), I will yet again ominously "to be continue" this post. I feel like this very ~impressive~ chart will make up for me only finishing 1/2 of my post. 

DIANE Y HAVEN'T U POSTED TODAY. Does that mean you're 3 posts behind??? 

well for your second punishment, I'm going to just going to go for the $$$$ and request a peach milkshake from chik-fil-a. or something sweet. you'd better start payin up. 

plzz come back i miss your insightful and very intelligent posts. 

xoxo,

elina