Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsRacial Preferences
IN THE NEWS

Racial Preferences

FEATURED ARTICLES
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 4, 1996
Re "Dole Can Win on the Coattails of CCRI," by David Horowitz, Commentary, Sept. 27: Horowitz underestimates the intelligence of the people of California. We in California will not reject President Clinton and embrace Bob Dole on the basis of a single issue--CCRI. Clinton is in sync with Californians on many other issues--education, job creation, deficit reduction, environment. Horowitz stated that before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the government preferentially hired whites. Does he want us to return to that situation?
ARTICLES BY DATE
NEWS
April 22, 2014 | By Alexandra Le Tellier
The Supreme Court upheld Michigan's ban on affirmative action on Tuesday. The 6-2 decision, as The Times' David Savage explains, “clears away constitutional challenges to the state bans on affirmative action, which began in California in 1996.” From Savage's article : “Justice Anthony Kennedy, speaking for the majority, said the democratic process can decide such issues. 'This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved,' he said. 'It is about who may resolve it. There is no authority in the Constitution of the United States or in this court's precedents for the judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit this policy determination to the voters.'” This is what The Times editorial board argued in October when it opined on the case: “This case isn't about whether state universities may provide preferential treatment in their admissions policies.
Advertisement
OPINION
July 19, 2003
I am so sincerely pleased to read the refreshing words of truth and justice from brave UC Regent Ward Connerly (letter, July 16). He has the courage to stand up to the ugly rhetoric and antics of affirmative action proponents who support racial preferences and discrimination. Please support Connerly in his righteous quest for a fair platform of competition, in which applicants are not judged by ancestry and skin color but on their achievements, talents and character. I am a graduate of UC Irvine.
OPINION
April 22, 2014 | By The Times editorial board
"Supreme Court rules against affirmative action. " That is likely to be a common shorthand description of Tuesday's decision upholding the constitutionality of Michigan's ban on the use of racial preferences in admission to state universities. But it's misleading. The 6-2 decision leaves undisturbed previous rulings in which the justices said that state universities may take race into account in admissions policies without violating the U.S. Constitution. But the court now has made it clear that although such preferences are permissible, voters may opt to prohibit them.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
April 3, 2012 | By Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times
Civil rights groups and aspiring minority college students have lost the latest bid to get the University of California to resume considering race in its admissions decisions. Proposition 209 banned the state's public universities from using racial preferences to increase the ranks of black, Latino and Native American students, and the 1996 voter initiative has already withstood several constitutional challenges. Two years ago, a class of prospective students and affirmative action advocates sued then-Gov.
NATIONAL
February 6, 2003 | David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer
By a 2 to 1 majority, Americans approve of President Bush's call to strike down a race-based admissions policy at the University of Michigan and say that students should be judged only on their academic records, according to a new Los Angeles Times poll.
OPINION
October 14, 2013 | By The Times editorial board
In 2006, Michigan voters banned affirmative action at the state's public universities. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments challenging that ban. If you support affirmative action, you must hope that the court will strike it down, right? Alas, it's not that simple. This case isn't about whether state universities may provide preferential treatment in their admissions policies. Rather, the question is whether the voters of Michigan violated the U.S. Constitution when they amended the state Constitution to say that universities "shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
April 25, 1991 | TERRY EASTLAND, Terry Eastland is resident fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and co-author of "Counting by Race: Equality from the Founding Fathers to Bakke and Weber."
With last week's breakdown of the effort by large corporations and civil-rights groups to agree on a jobs discrimination bill, the prospect for legislation supporting quotas has dimmed considerably. On this issue, the influence of the civil-rights lobby may finally, and thankfully, be declining. Two decades ago, of course, the lobby had enormous influence.
OPINION
March 28, 2014 | By The Times editorial board
The 40-year debate over affirmative action at state universities generally has been conducted in terms of general principles. At first, advocates emphasized the importance of compensating African Americans (and later others) for the effects of generations of discrimination, while opponents contended that the Constitution must be colorblind. Later, the debate shifted to the claim that there are educational benefits to a racially diverse student body, a rationale for preferences that the Supreme Court grudgingly has accepted.
OPINION
February 7, 2014 | By Jennifer Gratz
Much progress has been made in the fight for equal treatment under the law for all people. Unfortunately, California politicians are actively working to ensure that the state reverts to policies that treat people differently based on skin color or ethnic identity - policies that were rejected by voters more than 17 years ago. In 1996, California voters outlawed the use of racial preferences in state institutions by overwhelmingly passing Proposition 209....
OPINION
March 28, 2014 | By The Times editorial board
The 40-year debate over affirmative action at state universities generally has been conducted in terms of general principles. At first, advocates emphasized the importance of compensating African Americans (and later others) for the effects of generations of discrimination, while opponents contended that the Constitution must be colorblind. Later, the debate shifted to the claim that there are educational benefits to a racially diverse student body, a rationale for preferences that the Supreme Court grudgingly has accepted.
OPINION
February 7, 2014 | By Jennifer Gratz
Much progress has been made in the fight for equal treatment under the law for all people. Unfortunately, California politicians are actively working to ensure that the state reverts to policies that treat people differently based on skin color or ethnic identity - policies that were rejected by voters more than 17 years ago. In 1996, California voters outlawed the use of racial preferences in state institutions by overwhelmingly passing Proposition 209....
OPINION
October 14, 2013 | By The Times editorial board
In 2006, Michigan voters banned affirmative action at the state's public universities. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments challenging that ban. If you support affirmative action, you must hope that the court will strike it down, right? Alas, it's not that simple. This case isn't about whether state universities may provide preferential treatment in their admissions policies. Rather, the question is whether the voters of Michigan violated the U.S. Constitution when they amended the state Constitution to say that universities "shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin.
NEWS
September 5, 2013 | By Michael McGough
Joining with counterparts from five other states and the District of Columbia, state Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris has filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. Supreme Court implicitly arguing that California's ban on racial preferences by state universities is unconstitutional. Harris, it will be remembered, also refused to defend the constitutionality of Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage. In fact, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that proponents of Proposition 8 lacked standing to appeal a lower-court ruling striking down the amendment, Harris officiated at the marriage of two of the Proposition 8 plaintiffs.
OPINION
September 4, 2013
Re "Race returns to high court," Aug. 31 California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down a Michigan law that clearly buttresses the Constitution's equal protection clause (by barring racial preferences, which by design result in unequal protection) on the grounds that it violates that clause. It's as if she's asking the justices to rule that two plus two equals five. Such is the length to which affirmative action proponents must go in their desperate attempts to deny the plain fact that granting racial preferences is not merely an injustice but a clear, unambiguous violation of both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Constitution's 14th Amendment.
NEWS
July 3, 2013 | By Michael McGough
Supporters of affirmative action breathed a nervous sigh of relief last week when the Supreme Court essentially punted on a case that some had feared would have led to a gutting of racial preferences in admissions to state universities. But even if the court had declared such preferences unconstitutional, it doesn't follow that enrollment of minorities in higher education would have plummeted. Most colleges aren't highly selective. The political and legal debate about racial preferences is basically about a small sliver of highly competitive institutions.
OPINION
October 9, 2006
Re "Is that an activist judge?" Opinion, Oct. 2 An activist judge is a judge whose ruling you don't agree with. VINCENT DEVITA Northridge An activist judge is one who discerns a difference between affirmative action and racial preferences. GARY A. ROBB Los Feliz
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 24, 1997
In regard to John Lewis' Nov. 19 commentary on Bill Lann Lee, I would like to ask a simple question: What is fair? For all of Lewis' talk of "fairness," does it strike him as ironic that the very program of racial preferences that he is lauding would put Lee's children at a distinct disadvantage when they apply to college simply because they are of the wrong color? No matter that Asians in general, and Chinese in particular, have suffered from horrendous amounts of racism in this country's history, they are now the ones being told to attend lesser schools so that spaces may be made for equally or less qualified, but underrepresented, blacks and Hispanics.
OPINION
November 30, 2012
As the Supreme Court mulls whether the U.S. Constitution prohibits state universities from taking race into account in admissions decisions, a federal appeals court has moved in a very different direction. It recently held that, far from forbidding affirmative action, the Constitution prevents a state's voters from doing away with it. The case, decided this month by the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, was filed after Michigan voters approved Proposal 2, barring state and local governments as well as public universities from giving preferential treatment on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin.
OPINION
August 16, 2012
The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to reaffirm the right of public universities - particularly competitive and prestigious ones - to consider race as a factor in admissions decisions. This welcome and forceful endorsement of affirmative action comes in a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the Justice Department in a case challenging admissions policies at the University of Texas at Austin. The fact of the administration's intervention may be more influential than its specific arguments, which reflect the somewhat convoluted reasoning the court has adopted in upholding racial preferences in university admissions.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|