Racial quota

Last updated

Racial quotas in employment and education are numerical requirements or quotas for hiring, promoting, admitting and/or graduating members of a particular racial group. Racial quotas are often established as means of diminishing racial discrimination, addressing under-representation and evident racism against those racial groups or, the opposite, against the disadvantaged majority group (see numerus clausus or bhumiputra systems). Conversely, quotas have also been used historically to promote discrimination against minority groups by limiting access to influential institutions in employment and education.

Contents

These quotas may be determined by governmental authority and backed by governmental sanctions. When the total number of jobs or enrollment slots is fixed, this proportion may get translated to a specific number.

Regions and nations

Ancient Mongolia

The Mongols divided different races into a four-class system during the Yuan dynasty.

The Mongol Emperor Kublai Khan had introduced a hierarchy of reliability by dividing the population of the Yuan dynasty into the following classes:

Ancient China

Several laws enforcing racial segregation of foreigners were passed during the Tang dynasty. In 779 AD, the Tang dynasty issued an edict which forced Uighurs to wear their ethnic dress, and restricted them from marrying Chinese.

In 836 AD, Lu Chun was appointed as governor of Canton. He was disgusted to find Chinese living with foreigners and intermarriage. Lu enforced separation, banning interracial marriages, and prevented foreigners from owning properties. [1] The 836 law specifically banned Chinese from forming relationships with "Dark peoples" or "People of colour", terms referring to foreigners, such as "Iranians, Sogdians, Arabs, Indians, Malays, Sumatrans", etc. [2] [3]

France

By 1935, the French government enacted a series of racial quotas on certain professions. [4]

Germany

See Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses.

Malaysia

See Bumiputera (Malaysia).

United States

The National Origins Formula was an American system of immigration quotas, between 1921 and 1965, which restricted immigration on the basis of existing proportions of the population. The goal was to maintain the existing ethnic composition of the United States. It had the effect of giving low quotas to Eastern and Southern Europe.

Such racial quotas were restored after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, especially during the 1970s. [5] Richard Nixon's Labor Secretary George P. Shultz demanded that anti-black construction unions allow a certain number of black people into the unions. [5] The Department of Labor began enforcing these quotas across the country. [5] After a U.S. Supreme Court case, Griggs v. Duke Power Company , found that neutral application tests and procedures that still resulted in de facto segregation of employees (if previous discrimination had existed) were illegal, more companies began implementing quotas on their own. [5]

In a 1973 court case, a federal judge created one of the first mandated quotas when he ruled that half of the Bridgeport, Connecticut Police Department's new employees must be either black or Puerto Rican. [5] In 1974, the Department of Justice and the United Steelworkers of America came to an agreement on the largest-to-then quota program, for steel unions. [5]

In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment. [5] The Court said that "goals" and "timetables" for diversity could be set instead. [5] A 1979 Supreme Court case, United Steelworkers v. Weber , found that private employers could set rigid numerical quotas, if they chose to do so. [5] In 1980, the Supreme Court found that a 10% racial quota for federal contractors was permitted. [5]

In 1990 City University of New York was accused of discriminatory hiring practices against Italian-Americans. [6]

In 1991, President George H. W. Bush made an attempt to abolish affirmative action altogether, maintaining that "any regulation, rule, enforcement practice or other aspect of these programs that mandates, encourages, or otherwise involves the use of quotas, preferences, set-asides or other devices on the basis of race, sex, religion or national origin are to be terminated as soon as is legally feasible". [7] This claim led up to the creation of the Civil Rights Act of 1991; however, the document was not able to implement these changes. It only covered the terms for settling cases where discrimination has been confirmed to have occurred. [8]

College admissions in the United States have had racial quotas; see Numerus clausus § United States for details. These have notably included blanket bans on African-Americans, Jewish quotas from 1918 to the 1950s, and an alleged Asian quota from the 1980s and ongoing as of 2017.

South Africa

Local trade unions commonly use the term "Absolute representation" in this regard. [9]

Opposition

Students protesting against racial quotas in Brasilia, Brazil. The sign reads: "Want an opening? Pass the Vestibular (entry exam)!" Protesto contra o sistema de cotas.jpg
Students protesting against racial quotas in Brasília, Brazil. The sign reads: "Want an opening? Pass the Vestibular (entry exam)!"

Opponents of quotas object that one group is favored at the expense of another whenever a quota is invoked rather than factors such as grade point averages or test scores. They argue that using quotas displaces individuals that would normally be favored based on their individual achievements. Opponents of racial quotas believe that qualifications should be the only determining factor when competing for a job or admission to a school. It is argued this causes "reverse discrimination" [15] where individuals in the majority to lose out to a minority.

Examples

Some affirmative action programs openly involve quotas such as the admission program of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul. [16] (See also: Vestibular exam#Racial quotas.)

The law student organization Building a Better Legal Profession developed a method to encourage politically liberal students to avoid law firms whose racial makeup is markedly different from that of the population as a whole. In an October 2007 press conference reported in The Wall Street Journal , [17] and The New York Times, [18] the group released data publicizing the numbers of African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asian-Americans at America's top law firms. The group has sent information to top law schools around the country to encourage students who agree with its viewpoint to take the demographic data into account when they choose where to work after graduation. [19] As more students choose where to work based on firms' diversity rankings, firms face an increasing market pressure to change theirs. [20]

Examples of racial quotas

See also

Related Research Articles

Affirmative action refers to a set of policies and practices within a government or organization seeking to benefit marginalized groups. Historically and internationally, support for affirmative action has been justified by the idea that it may help with bridging inequalities in employment and pay, increasing access to education, and promoting diversity, social equity, and social inclusion and redressing alleged wrongs, harms, or hindrances, also called substantive equality.

Reverse discrimination is a term used to describe discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group, in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that involved a dispute of whether preferential treatment for minorities could reduce educational opportunities for whites without violating the Constitution. It upheld affirmative action, allowing race to be one of several factors in college admission policy. However, the court ruled that specific racial quotas, such as the 16 out of 100 seats set aside for minority students by the University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, were impermissible.

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), was a landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning affirmative action in student admissions. The Court held that a student admissions process that favors "underrepresented minority groups" did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause so long as it took into account other factors evaluated on an individual basis for every applicant. The decision largely upheld the Court's decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), which allowed race to be a consideration in admissions policy but held racial quotas to be unconstitutional. In Gratz v. Bollinger (2003), a separate case decided on the same day as Grutter, the Court struck down a points-based admissions system that awarded an automatic bonus to the admissions scores of minority applicants.

Numerus clausus is one of many methods used to limit the number of students who may study at a university. In many cases, the goal of the numerus clausus is simply to limit the number of students to the maximum feasible in some particularly sought-after areas of studies with an intent to keep a constant supply of qualified workforce and thus limit competition. In historical terms however, in some countries, numerus clausus policies were religious or racial quotas, both in intent and function.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1996 California Proposition 209</span> Referendum banning affirmative action

Proposition 209 is a California ballot proposition which, upon approval in November 1996, amended the state constitution to prohibit state governmental institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment, public contracting, and public education. Modeled on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the California Civil Rights Initiative was authored by two California academics, Glynn Custred and Tom Wood. It was the first electoral test of affirmative action policies in North America. It passed with 55% in favor to 45% opposed, thereby banning affirmative action in the state's public sector.

A Jewish quota was a discriminatory racial quota designed to limit or deny access for Jews to various institutions. Such quotas were widespread in the 19th and 20th centuries in developed countries and frequently present in higher education, often at prestigious universities.

<i>Hopwood v. Texas</i> 1996 U.S. court case

Hopwood v. Texas, 78 F.3d 932, was the first successful legal challenge to a university's affirmative action policy in student admissions since Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. In Hopwood, four white plaintiffs who had been rejected from University of Texas at Austin's School of Law challenged the institution's admissions policy on equal protection grounds and prevailed. After seven years as a precedent in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the Hopwood decision was abrogated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Affirmative action in the United States</span>

In the United States, affirmative action consists of government-mandated, government-approved, and voluntary private programs granting special consideration to groups considered or classified as historically excluded, specifically racial minorities and women. These programs tend to focus on access to education and employment in order to redress the disadvantages associated with past and present discrimination. Another goal of affirmative action policies is to ensure that public institutions, such as universities, hospitals, and police forces, are more representative of the populations they serve.

Racial diversity in United States schools is the representation of different racial or ethnic groups in American schools. The institutional practice of slavery, and later segregation, in the United States prevented certain racial groups from entering the school system until midway through the 20th century, when Brown v. Board of Education forbade racially segregated education. Globalization and migrations of peoples to the United States have increasingly led to a multicultural American population, which has in turn increased classroom diversity. Nevertheless, racial separation in schools still exists today, presenting challenges for racial diversification of public education in the United States.

Fisher v. University of Texas, 570 U.S. 297 (2013), also known as Fisher I, is a United States Supreme Court case concerning the affirmative action admissions policy of the University of Texas at Austin. The Supreme Court voided the lower appellate court's ruling in favor of the university and remanded the case, holding that the lower court had not applied the standard of strict scrutiny, articulated in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), to its admissions program. The Court's ruling in Fisher took Grutter and Bakke as given and did not directly revisit the constitutionality of using race as a factor in college admissions.

Schuette v. BAMN, 572 U.S. 291 (2014), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning affirmative action and race- and sex-based discrimination in public university admissions. In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause does not prevent states from enacting bans on affirmative action in education.

Quotaism is the concept of organizing society by a quota system, whether by racial, gender, language or another demographic attribute. Examples of quotas include gender quotas, racial quota, and reservations. The basic premise is to have demographics represented at all levels and aspects of the civilization according to national statistics.

Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions processes violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. With its companion case, Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, the Supreme Court effectively overruled Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), which validated some affirmative action in college admissions provided that race had a limited role in decisions.

Edward Jay Blum is an American conservative litigant who opposes classifications and preferences based on race and ethnicity.

Fisher v. University of Texas, 579 U.S. 365 (2016), also known as Fisher II, is a United States Supreme Court case which held that the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit correctly found that the University of Texas at Austin's undergraduate admissions policy survived strict scrutiny, in accordance with Fisher v. University of Texas (2013), which ruled that strict scrutiny should be applied to determine the constitutionality of the University's race-conscious admissions policy.

Affirmative action refers to activities or policies that seek to help groups that are often affected by discrimination obtain equal access to opportunities, particularly in areas such as employment and education. In the United States, in the early 2000s, the use of race, gender, and other factors in college and university admissions decisions came under attack.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Asian quota</span> Type of racial quota

An Asian quota is a racial quota limiting the number of people of Asian descent in an establishment, a special case of numerus clausus. It usually refers to alleged educational quotas in United States higher education admissions, specifically by Ivy League universities against Asian Americans, especially persons of East Asian and South Asian descent starting in the late 1980s. These allegations of discrimination have been denied by U.S. universities. Asian quotas have been compared to earlier claims of Jewish quotas, which are believed to have limited the admissions of a model minority from the 1910s to the 1950s. Jewish quotas were denied at the time, but their existence is rarely disputed now. Some have thus called Asian-Americans "The New Jews" of university admissions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 16</span> Measure to undo the states ban on affirmative action

Proposition 16 was a failed California ballot proposition that appeared on the November 3, 2020, general election ballot, asking California voters to amend the Constitution of California to repeal Proposition 209 (1996). Proposition 209 amended the state constitution to prohibit government institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment, public contracting, and public education. Therefore, Proposition 209 banned the use of race- and gender-based affirmative action in California's public sector and public university admissions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diversity, equity, and inclusion</span> Organizational framework

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are organizational frameworks which seek to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly groups who have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination on the basis of identity or disability. These three notions together represent "three closely linked values" which organizations seek to institutionalize through DEI frameworks. The concepts predate this terminology and other variations include diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging (DEIB), inclusion and diversity (I&D), justice, equity, diversity and inclusion, or diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility.

References

  1. ↑ Edward H. Schafer (1963). The golden peaches of Samarkand: a study of Tʻang exotics. University of California Press. p. 22. ISBN   0-520-05462-8 . Retrieved 28 June 2010.
  2. ↑ Mark Edward Lewis (2009). China's cosmopolitan empire: the Tang dynasty. Harvard University Press. p. 170. ISBN   978-0-674-03306-1 . Retrieved 28 October 2010.
  3. ↑ Jacques Gernet (1996). A history of Chinese civilization . Cambridge University Press. p.  294. ISBN   0-521-49781-7 . Retrieved 28 October 2010. 836 decree chinese people of colour.
  4. ↑ Tharoor, Ishaan (2 September 2015). "Europe's fear of Muslim refugees echoes rhetoric of 1930s anti-Semitism". The Washington Post . ISSN   0190-8286 . Retrieved 21 November 2015.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. pp.  242–244. ISBN   0-465-04195-7.
  6. ↑ "CUNY hit for Italian-American hiring bias". New York Post . 10 August 1990. p. 8. U.S. Labor Department .. Italian-Americans have yet to benefit .. identified in 1976
  7. ↑ "Bush to order end of rules allowing race-based hiring". The New York Times . 21 November 1991. Retrieved 14 October 2017.
  8. ↑ "Civil Rights Act of 1991 – Pub. L. 102–166 – findUSlaw". finduslaw.com.
  9. ↑ "Absolute representation | Stop Kwotas". stopkwotas.co.za. Retrieved 5 October 2014.
  10. ↑ "Solidarity to fight for minorities in SAPS – Crime & Courts | IOL News | IOL.co.za". iol.co.za. Retrieved 5 October 2014.
  11. ↑ "Background to Renate Barnard case". solidariteit.co.za. Retrieved 5 October 2014.
  12. ↑ "Bar still raised for white pupils – Cape Times | IOL.co.za". iol.co.za. Retrieved 5 October 2014.
  13. ↑ "University race quotas in spotlight". www.iol.co.za. Retrieved 20 September 2021.
  14. ↑ "South Africa bring back racial quotas for teams – International – Rugby Union – The Independent". independent.co.uk. 14 August 2013. Retrieved 5 October 2014.
  15. ↑ "What is reverse discrimination? definition and meaning". BusinessDictionary.com.
  16. ↑ Jeter, Jon (16 June 2003). "Affirmative Action Debate Forces Brazil to Take Look in the Mirror". The Washington Post . Archived from the original on 26 September 2018.
  17. ↑ Amir Efrati, You Say You Want a Big-Law Revolution, Take II, "Wall Street Journal", October 10, 2007.
  18. ↑ Liptak, Adam (29 October 2007). "In Students' Eyes, Look-Alike Lawyers Don't Make the Grade". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 4 July 2024.
  19. ↑ Weinstein, Henry (11 October 2007). "Lack of diversity marks L.A. law". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 4 July 2024.
  20. ↑ Thomas Adcock and Zusha Elinson, "Student Group Grades Firms On Diversity, Pro Bono Work", New York Law Journal, October 19, 2007, http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?hubtype=BackPage&id=1192698212305
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.