2007•bepress Legal RepositoryRequires access

Gender Curve: An Analysis of Colleges' Use of Affirmative Action Policies to Benefit Male Applicants

Debra Franzese

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

This comment evaluates the constitutionality of affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Part I sets out background information about potential causes of action and remedies for female students who challenge affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Section A discusses the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the development of the law regarding universities’ use of racial affirmative action policies. Section B discusses potential remedies under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”) and the similarity between Title IX and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VI”). Section C discusses state remedies available to students under educational equity statutes, human rights laws, and state equal rights amendments. Part II begins with a discussion of the relevant distinctions between racial affirmative action policies and affirmative action policies benefiting male applicants and sets forth a proposed framework to analyze male affirmative action policies. This Comment concludes that affirmative action policies benefiting males are unconstitutional because of colleges’ reliance on gender stereotypes when implementing them and because there is a lack of evidence to support a legitimate pedagogical objective for the use of such programs.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This comment evaluates the constitutionality of affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Part I sets out background information about potential causes of action and remedies for female students who challenge affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Section A discusses the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the development of the law regarding universities’ use of racial affirmative action policies. Section B discusses potential remedies under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”) and the similarity between Title IX and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VI”). Section C discusses state remedies available to students under educational equity statutes, human rights laws, and state equal rights amendments. Part II begins with a discussion of the relevant distinctions between racial affirmative action policies and affirmative action policies benefiting male applicants and sets forth a proposed framework to analyze male affirmative action policies. This Comment concludes that affirmative action policies benefiting males are unconstitutional because of colleges’ reliance on gender stereotypes when implementing them and because there is a lack of evidence to support a legitimate pedagogical objective for the use of such programs.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This comment evaluates the constitutionality of affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Part I sets out background information about potential causes of action and remedies for female students who challenge affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Section A discusses the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the development of the law regarding universities’ use of racial affirmative action policies. Section B discusses potential remedies under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”) and the similarity between Title IX and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VI”). Section C discusses state remedies available to students under educational equity statutes, human rights laws, and state equal rights amendments. Part II begins with a discussion of the relevant distinctions between racial affirmative action policies and affirmative action policies benefiting male applicants and sets forth a proposed framework to analyze male affirmative action policies. This Comment concludes that affirmative action policies benefiting males are unconstitutional because of colleges’ reliance on gender stereotypes when implementing them and because there is a lack of evidence to support a legitimate pedagogical objective for the use of such programs.

Key concepts: Affirmative action, Constitutionality, Statute, Equal Protection Clause, Law, Political science, State (computer science), Equity (law)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Gender Curve: An Analysis of Colleges' Use of Affirmative Action Policies to Benefit Male Applicants — Research Paper | ScholarLens