Affirmative Action* / Diversity Timeline * Includes employment, education and government contracts areas

Transcription

1 Affirmative Action* / Diversity Timeline * Includes employment, education and government contracts areas 1941 President Franklin Roosevelt issues Executive Order 8802, which bans racial discrimination in any defense industry receiving federal contracts and established the Fair Employment Practices Committee to investigate such complaints Desegregation of the United States Armed Forces 1954 Brown v. Board of Educ. Of Topeka, Shawnee Cty., Kan., 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (ended racial segregation in public schools) Montgomery bus boycott 1961 President John F. Kennedy issues Executive Order 10925, which creates the Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity and mandates that projects financed with federal funds take affirmative action to ensure that hiring and employment practices are free of racial bias Publication of Betty Friedan s The Feminine Mystique and the feminist movement begins President Lyndon B. Johnson signs The Civil Rights Act of President Johnson issues Executive Order 11246, which requires federal contractors to take affirmative action to employ women and minorities EEOC promulgates regulations that require employers with at least 100 employees or government contractors with 50 employees to fill out the EEO-1 Private Sector Report annually. This report is a snapshot of how many racial and ethnic minorities and women are working in a company. 29 C.F.R The Stonewall Riots galvanize the gay rights movement in the U.S Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971) (established the principle of disparate impact in employment discrimination cases).

2 1973 President Richard M. Nixon signs the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which requires agencies to submit an affirmative action plan to the EEOC for the hiring, placement, and advancement of individuals with disabilities. Specifically, Sections 501 and 503 mandate affirmative action to employ people with disabilities in the federal government and by government contractors, respectively. Section 504 prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities by entities receiving federal financial assistance Regents of the Univ. of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978) (established that a university s use of racial quotas in its admissions process was unconstitutional under the strict scrutiny standard of review, but that the use of race as a factor in admissions was constitutional in some cases) Fullilove v. Klutznick, 448 U.S. 448 (1980) (established that Congress could, through legislation, require at least 10% of federal funds granted for local public works programs be set aside for minority owned businesses under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14 th Amendment) City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc., 473 U.S. 432 (1985) (applied rational basis review to classifications based on mental retardation/disability, but overturned denial of permit to group home for people with mental retardation) Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) (upholding the constitutionality of a Georgia sodomy law criminalizing oral and anal sex in private between consenting adults when applied to homosexuals because the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not grant a fundamental right for homosexuals to engage in sodomy) City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469 (1989) (declared the city s program, which required construction contractors to set aside 30% of its subcontracts for minority owned businesses, did not pass the strict scrutiny test, i.e., narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest, and was therefore, unconstitutional) President George H.W. Bush signs the Americans with Disabilities Act of President George H.W. Bush signs the Civil Rights Act of 1991.

3 1995 Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200 (1995) (overruled Fullilove and extended Croson s strict scrutiny test to racial classifications on the federal level, finding that the government s presumption that minority owned businesses were socially and economically disadvantaged was unconstitutional) Hopwood v. Univ. of Texas Law School, 78 F.3d 932 (5th Cir. 1996) (rejected Bakke, and prohibited the use of race as a factor in law school admissions) Proposition 209 enacted in California which banned all forms of affirmation action in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting Washington state enacted Initiative 200, abolishing state affirmative action measures similar to Proposition 209 in California Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999) (under Title II of the ADA, States are required to place individuals with mental disabilities in a community setting rather than institutions when the State s treatment professionals have determined that community placement is appropriate, the individual does not oppose transferring to a community setting, and the placement can be reasonably accommodated) Florida bans using race as a factor in college admissions. Census includes multiracial categories. Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003) (University of Michigan s undergraduate admissions policy, which automatically added 20 points to applications of underrepresented minorities, was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection guarantees) Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) (University of Michigan Law School s plus system, which allowed the school to use race as a potential plus factor in the admissions process, did not amount to a quota system under Bakke, and therefore was constitutional because the school had a compelling interest in promoting class diversity). Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (explicitly overruling Bowers and finding a Texas state sodomy law unconstitutional because private, consensual sexual activity was protected under the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment). EEOC s issues Management Directive 715, which requires agencies with 1,000 employees or more to maintain a special recruitment program for individuals with

4 targeted disabilities and to establish specific goals for the employment and advancement of such individuals EEOC approves revisions to its EEO-1 Report, which included changes to the race and ethnicity categories as well as job categories Proposal 2 enacted in Michigan banning preferential treatment of minorities in public college admissions, public employment, public education or public contracting Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (2007) (prohibited assigning students to public schools solely for the purpose of achieving racial integration and declined to recognize racial balancing as a compelling state interest) Ballot measure banning affirmative action by public entities approved in Nebraska, rejected in Colorado. President George W. Bush signs the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557 (2009) (city s refusal to certify a promotion exam because it feared that minority firefighters would sue the city s use of the exam under a disparate impact theory, violated the Title VII disparate treatment rights of the Caucasian and Hispanic firefighters who performed well on the exam but were not promoted) President Obama signs the repeal of the military s Don t Ask, Don t Tell policy Arizona enacted Proposition 107 banning preferential treatment of minorities in public employment, public education, and public contracting Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v. Regents of the University of Michigan, 652 F.3d 607 (6th Cir. 2011) (overturned Proposal 2 in Michigan). NOTE: En banc review granted, vacating the Sixth Circuit s decision, scheduled for 3/7/ Supreme Court to decide Fisher v. Univ. of Texas at Austin (No ), whether a race-conscious admissions process similar to Grutter is constitutional where the State had already addressed diversity concerns with its Top Ten Percent Law, which guaranteed that the top ten percent of graduates from each Texas high school a spot at UT.

5 Projected U.S. Population Change: * , , ,655 (in thousands) , , (1)

6 Projected U.S. Population Percentage Change By Age: * 70% 60% 62.8% 60.0% 57.2% 56.8% 56.7% 50% 40% Ages % Ages 65 and Over 20% 12.97% 16.05% 19.30% 20.03% 20.17% 10% 0% (2)

7 2010 Actual Demographics* Hispanic 16.03% Two or More Races 1.53% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.15% Asian 4.54% American Indian and Alaskan Native 0.77% Black 12.24% White 64.74% (3)

8 2020 Projected Demographics* Hispanic 19.44% Two or More 1.87% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.16% Asian 5.36% American Indian and Alaskan Native 0.79% White 60.12% Black 12.26% (4)

9 2030 Projected Demographics* Hispanic 23.01% Two or More Races 2.23% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.17% Asian 6.16% White 55.47% American Indian and Alaskan Native 0.79% Black 12.17% (5)

10 2040 Projected Demographics* Two or More Races 2.63% Hispanic 26.68% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.18% White 50.79% Asian 6.92% American Indian and Alaskan Native 0.78% Black 12.02% (6)

11 2050 Projected Demographics* Two or More Races 3.04% Hispanic 30.25% White 46.32% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.18% Asian 7.61% American Indian and Alaskan Native 0.76% Black 11.83% (7)

12 Projected U.S. Population Percentage Changes By Race: * White 40 Hispanic Black Asian American Indian and Alaskan Native Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 2 or More Races (8)