Discrimination Chapter 43

What Is Discrimination? What Is Discrimination? Our legal traditions are rooted in part in a commitment to equality. Discrimination— treating some people differently because of their membership in a group—conflicts with this goal of equality. Our legal traditions are rooted in part in a commitment to equality. Discrimination— treating some people differently because of their membership in a group—conflicts with this goal of equality. Not all types of discrimination are unfair or illegal, however. Not all types of discrimination are unfair or illegal, however. The process of making laws often requires separating people into categories. The process of making laws often requires separating people into categories. As long as these classifications are found by the courts to be reasonable, they are usually legal. As long as these classifications are found by the courts to be reasonable, they are usually legal.

14 th Amendment Provides that no state shall deny to any person the equal protection of the law Provides that no state shall deny to any person the equal protection of the law Supreme Court rulings generally establish the minimum protections against discrimination that the U.S. Constitution requires. Supreme Court rulings generally establish the minimum protections against discrimination that the U.S. Constitution requires. State constitutions, state laws, and local laws may extend greater protection against discrimination, as long as these protections do not infringe on other constitutional rights. State constitutions, state laws, and local laws may extend greater protection against discrimination, as long as these protections do not infringe on other constitutional rights. To determine whether a law or government practice meets the equal protection clause, the courts use one of three of the following different tests, depending upon the type of discrimination involved To determine whether a law or government practice meets the equal protection clause, the courts use one of three of the following different tests, depending upon the type of discrimination involved

Rational Basis Test Used in most discrimination tests. Used in most discrimination tests. The courts will uphold a discriminatory law or government action as long as there is a rational basis for the differential treatment. The courts will uphold a discriminatory law or government action as long as there is a rational basis for the differential treatment. A rational basis exists when there is a logical relationship between the discriminatory treatment and the purpose of the law. A rational basis exists when there is a logical relationship between the discriminatory treatment and the purpose of the law. Examples: driver license, marriage, school, drinking alcohol Examples: driver license, marriage, school, drinking alcohol

Strict Scrutiny Test The Strict Scrutiny Test. The Strict Scrutiny Test. Used by the courts if a law or action discriminates based on race, national origin, or other fundamental constitutional right. Used by the courts if a law or action discriminates based on race, national origin, or other fundamental constitutional right. The law or action will be found unconstitutional unless the state can show that the discrimination classification serves a compelling interest and that there is no other less discriminating way to serve that interest The law or action will be found unconstitutional unless the state can show that the discrimination classification serves a compelling interest and that there is no other less discriminating way to serve that interest

Substantial Relationship Test In gender discrimination, the courts must show a close connection, not just a rational basis, between the law or practice and the government purpose, which must serve an important government interest. In gender discrimination, the courts must show a close connection, not just a rational basis, between the law or practice and the government purpose, which must serve an important government interest.

Remedies to discrimination In theory schools were open to all races after Brown v. Board of Education In theory schools were open to all races after Brown v. Board of Education Often in reality, segregation continued Often in reality, segregation continued Remedies to make up for past inequalities were needed, and some of them are controversial Remedies to make up for past inequalities were needed, and some of them are controversial Redrawing school boundary lines Redrawing school boundary lines Transferring teachers Transferring teachers Magnet School Magnet School Special programs Special programs Busing Busing

Busing Proponents claim- racially balanced schools can help provide equal educational opportunity Proponents claim- racially balanced schools can help provide equal educational opportunity Opponents claim- neighborhood students are better off being closer to home and being educated with other students and friends within their community Opponents claim- neighborhood students are better off being closer to home and being educated with other students and friends within their community Rich vs. Poor school districts. Share the wealth programs.

Affirmative Action A remedy for dealing with the effects of discrimination by taking positive steps to remedy for past discrimination in employment and education A remedy for dealing with the effects of discrimination by taking positive steps to remedy for past discrimination in employment and education Affirmative Action programs remain controversial Affirmative Action programs remain controversial Opponents argue that they amount to reverse discrimination Opponents argue that they amount to reverse discrimination

Affirmative Action Case Precedence Regents of U.C. v. Bakke (1978) Regents of U.C. v. Bakke (1978) Minority applicants went through a different admissions process Minority applicants went through a different admissions process 16 of 100 positions held for minority applicants 16 of 100 positions held for minority applicants Supreme Court Ruling- Quotas are unconstitutional because they insolate minority applicants from competition However- race can be used as a “plus” factor Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) Denied admittance on the claim by Grutter that the school used race as the “predominant” factor in admittance Supreme Court Ruling- The United States Constitution doesn’t prohibit the law school from narrowly tailoring the use of admissions to further a compelling interest to obtain educational benefits of diversity. The opinion also implied that affirmative action policies aren’t meant to be permanent and the goal should be to be “colorblind within the next 25 years