It’s been 40 years since John F. Kennedy asked Americans to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.” That was 118 years after the first known African American student was admitted to the University in 1853.

On July 1, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals repealed Proposal 2, returning Michigan colleges to their original admissions method in which race and gender are considered in an effort to promote diversity in the student body.

Proposal 2 — an amendment to section 26 article 1 of the state constitution — passed in 2006 with a 58 percent to 42 percent vote, proving residents’ desire for all Michigan public colleges and universities to discontinue preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin. While the future of Proposal 2 is unclear, the repeal begs the question: Is affirmative action still necessary in the world today?

Affirmative action or race preference?

Prof. of Philosophy Carl Cohen, a leader of the Proposal 2 initiative, argued that affirmative action will always be a positive thing. But what he opposes is the idea of preference based on race and gender.

“Is affirmative action still necessary? Well, in the original sense I think it is," Cohen said. "I think there’s still reason, for example, to have committees and boards to investigate whether or not there’s discriminatory conduct taking place. There’s still reason to examine efforts to determine whether or not qualifications for certain types of employment are really relevant or are ways of weeding people out.

“What do we think of race preference? That’s really the issue. We all support affirmative action, or at least anyone decent does. What we don’t all support is preference.”

He believes preference based on race is “unhealthy” for minority groups because while individuals get breaks, the group is “put under a cloud” by the assumption that many group members are accepted into colleges or hired for employment because of affirmative action and not because they deserve to be. Many minorities who went to college under affirmative action could have been accepted without the policy, and the disadvantages of affirmative action are far greater in the long run, Cohen said.

“When you see blacks on our campus now, they didn’t get here with preference. You can’t look down your nose at minorities at Michigan now. You can’t say, ‘Oh, you know how they got here.’ Not now, not in Michigan. And I think that’s a great thing for the minorities. They don’t have to excuse themselves,” he said.

One of the main arguments Cohen has against the implementation of affirmative action is that the United States constitution clearly states the consideration of race — the basis of affirmative action — is illegal.

“It’s wrong to treat anyone different because of their race. Race should not count, and it’s wrong if it counts,” he said.

Hidden disadvantages within race

John Matlock, associate vice provost and director of the Office of Academic Multicultural Initiatives, said he supports affirmative action, especially since University admissions also considers many aspects apart from race.

Affirmative action enables minorities to get an education, which will help them get jobs — something he said he believes is vital to the success of our country.

“College is a gateway to success, and if we keep people from going to college, we really have an impact on the success of individuals and also the future of the country,” he explained.

Matlock further explained that because minorities still face prejudice in the U.S., and it's harder for them to get jobs, affirmative action is necessary in order to level the playing field.