The Civil Rights Act of 1964 also adds to the complex of jurisprudence and legislation that make up the current implementation of affirmative action. Title VI of this act calls for the elimination of programs that "are neutral on their face but have the effect of discriminating." (U.S. Attorney General, July 14, 1994, memo)

Contrary to popular perception, quotas are not synonymous with affirmative action and have been illegal in this country since the Supreme Court's Bakke decision in 1978. Quotas, in this sense, are defined as "an inflexible number or percentage of available positions for members of specific groups." (Coalition for Affirmative Action)

Affirmative action, as currently practiced in its present scope, is not intentional efforts to correct past discriminatory practices toward women and people of color. Rather affirmative action programs, when most effectively instituted, work to change the present maintenance of inequality that has sprung from the combination of current discrimination and the ongoing effect of past discrimination and exclusion.

Although currently under attack in the legislative realm (particularly in California), affirmative action has not yet been changed on the federal level. In the judicial realm, the June 1995 "Adarand" Supreme Court ruling did not end affirmative action. It did, however, move the standard for proving discrimination away from a results-based standard toward an intent-based standard. This will result in making discrimination more difficult, lengthy, and costly to prove.


Session 11: Dealing with Controversy