Reverse discrimination occurs when a majority group is treated less advantageously in favor of a minority group. Civil rights laws have been passed to right historical wrongs, but some argue that affirmative action and other laws favoring traditionally discriminated against groups are reverse discrimination. Specific quotas for minority applicants are deemed unconstitutional.
Reverse discrimination occurs when a group that is generally favored or considered the majority is treated less advantageously in favor of a minority group. In other words, reverse discrimination can occur when men – traditionally a majority and favored group – are discriminated against in favor of women. Such discrimination can also occur when Caucasians are treated less favorably than non-Caucasians.
In the United States and many other countries, there is a long history of discrimination against certain races or classes of people. In order to right these wrongs and create a more equal society, civil rights laws have been passed in various forms. In the United States, for example, the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, gender, national origin, and color.
As a result of increased attention to non-discrimination and the potential penalties associated with disobedience to civil rights norms, in some contexts, minority groups have become favored over traditional majority groups who enjoyed preferential treatment. Additionally, other rules and laws have been passed, such as affirmative action, where traditionally discriminated against groups are given some preference under the law. Some argue that this type of behavior is reverse discrimination.
For example, if a man and a woman score exactly the same on a test to become a manager, the woman may be hired instead of the man simply due to her status as a woman and the fact that there aren’t many women in the field. like men. Some argue that this is reverse discrimination. Under the law, however, such a decision would be perfectly legal, even if it discriminated against the male candidate.
However, some types of reverse discrimination have been deemed unconstitutional. For example, in a 1997 case titled Gratz v. Bollinger, Jennifer Gratz applied to the University of Michigan law school. Her application was rejected due to her Caucasian status, while less qualified African-American applicants were admitted to the school. Under Michigan’s system for admissions, students were assigned numerical point values to determine admission, and African-American students were assigned a high number of points in this system, resulting in a disproportionate advantage in gaining entry to the school .
The court ruled that while affirmative action is perfectly legal and race-related is also legal, Michigan’s conduct escalated to the level of reverse discrimination because the school had “protected” seats for minority applicants. In other words, this ruling ruled that specific quotas, in which certain jobs or jobs are open exclusively to a minority race, were not permitted by law. While this form of discrimination aimed at righting historical wrongs, it was still deemed too discriminatory to be subjected to the equal protection rules provided by the Constitution.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
