Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

June-01-04

Affirmative Action Victories in Michigan, California

An anti-affirmative action campaign in Michigan has experienced so many setbacks that it will now push back its plans by two years. The so-called Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, led by affirmative action opponent Ward Connerly, had attempted to gather enough signatures to place an anti-affirmative action initiative on the November 2004 ballot. However, “because of internal disorganization, internal discord, legal decisions, and Ward Connerly’s health problems … the intent now is to qualify for the [2006] ballot,” said state Rep. Leon Drolet, R-Clinton Township, according to the Associated Press. The ballot initiative would have banned affirmative action policies aimed at increasing opportunities for women and people of color.

Connerly led the ultimately successful Proposition 209 campaign in California, which was opposed by a broad coalition of women’s rights and civil rights groups, including the Feminist Majority, the National Organization for Women, the YWCA, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund. As the Michigan initiative was attempting to do, Proposition 209 effectively ended affirmative action in government hiring, public contracting, and college admissions.

However, in the wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the use of affirmative action policies at the University of Michigan, the California state Assembly recently passed a bill that would allow universities to consider race, gender, and income in the admissions process, according to the Associated Press. Though opponents contend that the bill would violate Proposition 209, Assembly member Marco Firebaugh (D-South Gate), the sponsor of the bill, said, “[T]his measure gives flexibility to [the University of California and California State University] to consider [factors such as race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin] in considering a student. They may not be the determining factor,” AP reports.

JOIN the Feminist Majority

Media Resources: Associated Press 5/28/04, 5/26/04; Feminist Majority


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/20/2014 North Carolina Board of Elections Eliminates On-Campus Voting Sites Across the State - North Carolina will begin state-wide early voting on Thursday, and unlike the 2012 presidential election, many students across the state will have no polling place on-campus, making it more difficult for students to exercise their right to vote. The North Carolina State Board of Elections recently eliminated the only on-campus voting location for the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, a campus with more than 20,000 students. . . .
 
10/20/2014 Jay Leno Receives Mark Twain Prize, Salutes Mavis and Her Work for Women's Rights - Former long-time host of "The Tonight Show" Jay Leno saluted his wife, Mavis, for her work on behalf of women's rights around the world when he was awarded the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor this weekend at The Kennedy Center in Washington, DC. The Mark Twain prize is awarded for comedic achievement, and the event, where Leno performed a monologue and paid tribute to the many comedians he has worked with throughout his career, brought together supporters of the The John F. . . .
 
10/20/2014 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Slams Supreme Court for Upholding Voter Suppression in Texas - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued a blistering dissent after a ruling by the US Supreme Court this weekend threatened to disqualify more than half a million Texas voters from early voting. In an unsigned order Saturday, a majority of the Supreme Court sided with a Texas law requiring voters to produce specific forms of photo identification in order to cast a ballot in the 2014 election. . . .