Timeline: A Heated History of Affirmative Action in America

1954: Brown v. Board of Education

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court discredits the concept of “separate but equal,” ruling that segregation in public schools violates the Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment. The decision is vehemently opposed by segregationists, and it takes years before many segregated schools in the South are forced to integrate.

1964: Civil Rights Act

President Lyndon B. Johnson signs the most sweeping piece of civil rights legislation since Reconstruction. The new law prohibits discrimination in various settings, including hotels, schools and government services. It prevents employers, labor unions and employment agencies from excluding applicants and customers on the basis of race, sex, color, religion or national origin. A commission is established to enforce the law.

1965: Johnson defines affirmative action

In a graduation speech at Howard University — a historically Black college — President Johnson insists it is not enough to just have laws that prohibit discrimination, arguing that more proactive measures are necessary. “You do not take a man who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate him, bring him to the starting line of a race, saying, ‘You are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe you have been completely fair,” he said. Later that year, Johnson issues a new executive order requiring government contractors to “take affirmative action” to ensure racial equality in hiring and employment.

1978: Racial quotas at University of California struck down

In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down a UC policy that reserved admission slots for minority applicants, ruling it a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The court says UC can continue to consider race and ethnicity as a factor in the admissions decision as long as it doesn’t have specific quotas in place. The case originated when Allan Bakke, a 33-year-old white student who was twice rejected from UC Davis Medical School, filed suit, claiming it was unfair that minority applicants with lower academic standing were accepted over him.

1982: Racial hiring quotas mandated for Alabama state police

In 1970, a federal court ordered the Alabama Department of Public Safety — which hadn’t hired a single Black patrol officer in its 37-year history — to end “pervasive, systematic and obstinate discriminatory exclusion of blacks.” By 1982, after the department had failed to promote any Black employees above entry-level positions, the court orders a racial quota system be put in place until at least a quarter of the department’s upper ranks are minorities. The U.S. Supreme Court, in 1987, upholds the quota system, ruling it necessary in light of the department’s overt history of discrimination.

March 1996: University of Texas Law School’s affirmative action policy struck down

In Hopwood v. Texas, a federal court rules that the school’s policy of lower admission thresholds for minority applicants is unconstitutional. The court rejects the defense’s argument that a diverse student body is a “compelling” interest.

November 1996: California voters approve affirmative action ban

Voters approve Prop 209, which amends the state’s constitution and prohibits state institutions, including public universities, from considering race, sex or ethnicity in admissions and hiring decisions. A federal district judge initially blocks enforcement of the proposition, but an appeals court overturns that ruling and allows the measure to proceed. It has since survived numerous legal challenges. Meanwhile, Black and Hispanic enrollment in the UC system dropped significantly after the ban took effect in 1998. Since then, eight other states have passed similar affirmative action bans, including Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.

2003: Split rulings on University of Michigan’s admissions policies

The U.S. Supreme Court rejects the university’s undergraduate admissions policy of awarding points to minority applicants, arguing that it’s too similar to a quota system. But in a separate ruling, the court upholds the law school’s policy of considering an applicant’s race in admissions decisions, which it deems a “compelling interest.” However, three years later, Michigan voters approve a statewide affirmative action ban that effectively invalidates the law school’s policy.

2014: Court upholds Michigan’s voter-approved affirmative action ban

In a major blow to affirmative action policies nationwide, the U.S. Supreme Court upholds a 2006 Michigan voter-approved ban on race-conscious admissions policies in public universities. The court argues that state voters should have the authority to determine this issue on their own, without the court intervening. While the decision doesn’t outlaw affirmative action policies in schools outside of Michigan, it gives other states the green light do so. In her impassioned dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argues that the decision unconstitutionally infringes on the rights of minorities.

2016: High court narrowly upholds UT Austin’s race-conscious admissions policies

After her rejection from the University of Texas at Austin in 2008, Abigail Fisher, a white honor student, claimed she was unfairly denied admission because of her race. A federal court upheld the school’s race-conscious admissions policy. But in 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court sent the case back to the lower court for further review. In 2016, the high court again takes up the challenge to the university’s affirmative action policy, this time narrowly upholding it in a 4-3 decision, with now-retired Justice Anthony Kennedy casting the deciding vote.

June 29, 2023: US Supreme Court rejects affirmative action in college admissions

In a historic 6-3 decision, the court’s conservative majority struck down affirmative action admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, effectively barring all public and private colleges from considering race in admissions decisions. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said considering an applicant’s race “cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause,” although he noted that the decision doesn’t prevent universities from “considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life.”

In a scathing dissent read from the bench, Justice Sonia Sotomayor accused the majority of “further entrenching racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society.”