28. How does sexual harassment have to do with the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Through interpretation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act during the late 1970s, the courts decided that sexual harassment was a form of discrimination. The courts recognized two forms of sexual harassment: “quid pro quo” harassment (implied threat wherein submission is “continued employment”), and “hostile environment” (offensive/intimidating employment conditions). After much debate, the courts ruled that sexual harassment is legally actionable whether or not the individual suffered harm, only if the accused held authority over the employer.
29. Explain equality in employment. Inequality in employment was mainly present through pay discrimination by gender. …show more content…
Briefly explain how Latinos and Hispanic Americans were discriminated. The term Latinos encompasses a wide range of ethnically diverse cultural identities and experiences. For instance, Mexican American’s political experiences were shaped by religion and race. Mexican Americans were discriminated in schooling, territorial ownership, etc. Eventually, after countless political movements and several Supreme Court cases, Mexican Americans attained political positions in Congress in the 1950s.
31. Briefly explain how Asian Americans were discriminated. In the late nineteenth century, Asian Americans were denied eligibility for citizenship. Many Chinese and Japanese immigrants faced major discrimination during the 1880s in California, and the number of Asian Americans only grew. Finally, after the 1965 Immigration Act, (lifting discriminatory quotas) was implemented, Asian immigration grew rapidly.
32. How were Native Americans discriminated? Under the Constitution, Native Americans are not given political status, and the courts eventually declared that Native Americans were non-US citizens. Native Americans were finally granted political status in 1924 when citizenship was awarded to any person born in the United States. Also, Native Americans tried to expand their rights by account of their sovereign …show more content…
Describe the Supreme Court and the burden of proof. All three branches of government try to shape the definition of affirmative action, by asking themselves what is the suitable amount of review in cases regarding affirmative action. Also, to prove that discrimination has/has not occurred, should the strain be placed upon the plaintiff or the defendant? After the Supreme Court case of the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the Court limited the use of quotas (in situations where discrimination had been shown, or if the quotas were “used as a guideline for social diversity”).
38. Explain the referenda on Affirmative Action. Over the years, affirmative action has presented itself in state and local policies. The passage of the 1996 California Civil Rights Initiative was extremely significant, because it permitted the use of affirmative action in both local and state governments. As a result, governments were prohibited from using racial (or gender) discrimination in contracting or employment
29. Explain equality in employment. Inequality in employment was mainly present through pay discrimination by gender. …show more content…
Briefly explain how Latinos and Hispanic Americans were discriminated. The term Latinos encompasses a wide range of ethnically diverse cultural identities and experiences. For instance, Mexican American’s political experiences were shaped by religion and race. Mexican Americans were discriminated in schooling, territorial ownership, etc. Eventually, after countless political movements and several Supreme Court cases, Mexican Americans attained political positions in Congress in the 1950s.
31. Briefly explain how Asian Americans were discriminated. In the late nineteenth century, Asian Americans were denied eligibility for citizenship. Many Chinese and Japanese immigrants faced major discrimination during the 1880s in California, and the number of Asian Americans only grew. Finally, after the 1965 Immigration Act, (lifting discriminatory quotas) was implemented, Asian immigration grew rapidly.
32. How were Native Americans discriminated? Under the Constitution, Native Americans are not given political status, and the courts eventually declared that Native Americans were non-US citizens. Native Americans were finally granted political status in 1924 when citizenship was awarded to any person born in the United States. Also, Native Americans tried to expand their rights by account of their sovereign …show more content…
Describe the Supreme Court and the burden of proof. All three branches of government try to shape the definition of affirmative action, by asking themselves what is the suitable amount of review in cases regarding affirmative action. Also, to prove that discrimination has/has not occurred, should the strain be placed upon the plaintiff or the defendant? After the Supreme Court case of the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the Court limited the use of quotas (in situations where discrimination had been shown, or if the quotas were “used as a guideline for social diversity”).
38. Explain the referenda on Affirmative Action. Over the years, affirmative action has presented itself in state and local policies. The passage of the 1996 California Civil Rights Initiative was extremely significant, because it permitted the use of affirmative action in both local and state governments. As a result, governments were prohibited from using racial (or gender) discrimination in contracting or employment