Affirmative Action

What it is

Affirmative action refers to policies and practices designed to increase opportunities in education, employment, and government contracting for groups historically underrepresented or subject to discrimination. It has addressed race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, and veteran status by encouraging or requiring organizations to consider these characteristics in admissions, hiring, contracting, and allocation of financial aid.

Goals

• Counteract historical and systemic barriers to access.
• Improve representation of marginalized groups in schools, workplaces, and public contracting.
• Promote diversity and equal opportunity through targeted support such as scholarships, grants, training, and recruitment efforts.

How it works

Common elements of affirmative action programs include:
* Financial assistance: grants, scholarships, and targeted outreach to increase access to education.
* Hiring and recruitment practices: active recruitment of diverse candidate pools, consideration of demographic factors, and structured interviews to reduce bias.
* Contracting requirements and targets: federal and state contractors may be required to set goals or take steps to include minority- or women-owned businesses.
* Compliance mechanisms: agencies may condition funding or contracts on meeting specified diversity or inclusion requirements.

Note: employment equity (treating all applicants equally) is distinct from affirmative action (taking steps to support those historically denied opportunities).

Key historical milestones

• 1961 — President John F. Kennedy used the term “affirmative action,” directing federal contractors to ensure equal treatment in hiring.
• 1965 — Executive Order 11246 required federal contractors to expand job opportunities for minorities and created enforcement structures for compliance.
• 1973 — Rehabilitation Act required affirmative action plans for people with disabilities in federal agencies.
• 1990–1991 — Americans with Disabilities Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1991 strengthened protections and employment access.
• 2023 — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and the companion UNC case that race-based consideration in college admissions violates the Equal Protection Clause, overruling earlier precedents that had allowed limited use of race (e.g., Grutter v. Bollinger and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke).

Examples of use

• Federal contractor requirements to recruit and hire minority candidates.
• University outreach, scholarships, and holistic admissions practices (historically including race as one factor).
• Development programs and procurement goals for minority business enterprises.
• Hiring and advancement plans to increase gender diversity and accommodate people with disabilities and covered veterans.

Advantages

• Expands educational and career access for historically excluded groups.
• Increases diversity in leadership, classrooms, and workplaces, which proponents link to better decision-making and innovation.
• Provides targeted support (financial, training, recruitment) to level uneven starting points.

Criticisms and disadvantages

• Opponents argue it can produce reverse discrimination and undermine merit-based decisions.
• Skeptics point to limited progress and the cost of implementing programs.
• Debate persists over fairness, effectiveness, and whether demographic considerations should play a role in hiring and admissions.

Public opinion and recent trends

• Polling shows substantial public ambivalence and division by race and political affiliation. For example, recent surveys have reported majorities favoring admissions based on merit and opposing consideration of a candidate’s racial or ethnic background in hiring or promotion decisions.
• The 2023 Supreme Court decisions significantly narrowed the legal ability to use race explicitly in college admissions, prompting institutions to explore race-neutral alternatives to maintain diverse student bodies.

Practical implications going forward

• Colleges and universities must redesign admissions policies to achieve diversity without explicit race-based considerations.
• Employers and contractors continue to be subject to federal and state requirements in many contexts, though specific practices may shift toward race-neutral strategies that focus on socioeconomic factors, targeted outreach, and structured hiring processes.
• Affirmative action remains a contested policy area balancing equity goals with legal and political constraints.

Bottom line

Affirmative action seeks to correct historical inequities and promote representation for underrepresented groups through targeted programs and policies. While it has expanded access in many areas, legal rulings and public debate continue to reshape how institutions pursue diversity and equal opportunity.