Even in 1969 affirmative action was nothing new, in 1954, when the Supreme Court ruled on Brown versus Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas the African American community had legal restraints removed that had long kept them at a distinct disadvantage. Minorities had long been imposed to prejudice, especially from the greater white population. However the Brown decision failed to cease many white advantages and professional supremacies; “it merely allowed Blacks to enter the arena of competition,” (Greenberg 300).” The Brown decision only cracked the door of segregation of public facilities it did nothing to help minorities in the workplace. After the United States Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 min

Programs such that California, Texas, and Florida have been put into effect create a more evenly balanced plane but, as with all affirmative action initiatives, they are not without their faults and inaccuracies. Again, because of stringent, inflexible wording in these decisions, there are major loopholes in the intent of these programs. For instance, the Hopwood case merely discusses the process to be allowed to attend the University of Texas School of law; there is nothing within the verdict that concerns scholarships, student loans, or even admission to other schools at the university. Sometimes, even in the defense of equality, the effort of some only goes so far. Affirmative action was created to address prejudicial obstructions that were present during the civil rights movement. During this time, the United States was taken aback by the massive amount racial pressure it witnessed in demonstrations and protests. Minorities, especially African Americans, supposed that retribution could be attained for the years of discrimination that had been endured, however, in life there really is no eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Affirmative action is a noble theory but difficult to put apply in practice, requiring employers, universities and the people that occupy such organizations only produces complications rather than countering them. I would not expect the entirety of the white race to take responsibility for years of racial persecution and the ignorance of our forefathers. Discrimination is, in essence, nothing more than the foolish acts of a few prejudiced individuals in a population of many. Regrettably, society as a whole has not dismissed the archaic belief that any ethnic group could be inferior to another and does not truly operate fairly toward minorities. To date, affirmative action has not actually created fair conditions for anyone it has only shifted the injustice from one select group to another. Only when we stop judging persons by anything but their integrity and ability will we be able to contentedly coexist.

orities were no longer prohibited from the use of public facilities and job discrimination was no longer legally sanctioned. It became apparent that certain business traditions, such as seniority status and aptitude tests, prevented total equality in employment. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a major step in reducing de jure or law based discrimination but was unable to cease deep seeded de facto or actual discrimination in American society. The Civil Rights Act did not require employers to prove that any discriminatory policies were or were not used in the hiring of personnel, “Instead, the burden of proof was on the woman or minority group member who had been denied a particular job,” (Patterson 161). After enough workplace settlements affirmative action was created to extend the effort of equality in the workplace and school. On September 24, 1965, Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order #11246 at Howard University that required federal contractors “to take affirmati

Some topics in this essay:
Advisory Committee, Rights Act, African Americans, Asians United, University California, Control Act, Twenty Plan”, African American, Amendment Constitution, Texas School, affirmative action, action programs, affirmative action programs, civil rights, rights act, racial ethnic, affirmative action policies, action policies, treatment minorities, civil rights act, university texas, supreme court, public facilities, rights act 1964, 1969 affirmative action,