Social Work and the Law

Paper Summary:

This paper examines and analyzes the case brought against the admissions policy of the University of Michigan Law School. The paper explains the district court decision that the Law School was breaking the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with its affirmative action policies. The paper also discusses the defendant's and plaintiff's argument in the case, precedence considered in the case and dissenting opinion.

From the Paper:

"According to the appeal submitted by the defendant Extensive trial testimony presented by the students on the current experience in California shows that if the Regents are stripped of this power, the University of Michigan Law School will resegregate. In 1995, the University of California (UC) Regents voted to eradicate their longstanding affirmative action policies. The results were clear and devastating - minority admissions to the best-regarded schools plummeted; inequality in educational opportunity between white students and minority students increased as the UC system split into two separate and uneven tracks; prejudice on campus grew. Earlier this year, the UC Regents, admitting the failure of their ill-conceived social experiment, collectively voted to lift the ban on affirmative action programs throughout the UC System. the plaintiff asked to graft the same intensification of inequality that has been reject in California onto the Fourteenth Amendment-to make a permanent constitutional provision."

More papers on Social Work and the Law:

• Term Paper # 106409 : "Social Engineering and the Law"
• Essay # 39763 : "Durkheim and the Law"
• Term Paper # 136117 : "Black Perspectives and Social Work Implications"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: