What Happened to Affirmative Action?
Affirmative Action, a set of policies designed to address historical and systemic discrimination, has undergone significant changes, particularly in the United States. While initially aimed at promoting equal opportunities in employment and education for marginalized groups, its scope has been substantially curtailed by recent Supreme Court rulings and federal agency actions. As of August 2026, race-conscious admissions in higher education are largely prohibited, and federal contractors face significantly reduced race and gender-based affirmative action requirements.
Quick Answer
Affirmative Action in the United States has been largely dismantled in recent years. The Supreme Court's June 2023 decision in *Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/UNC* effectively ended race-conscious admissions in higher education nationwide. Following this, in 2025 and 2026, federal executive orders and agency actions, including by the EEOC and OFCCP, rescinded long-standing race and gender-based affirmative action requirements for federal contractors and voluntary employer guidelines, significantly narrowing its application in employment.
📊Key Facts
📅Complete Timeline13 events
President Kennedy Issues Executive Order 10925
President John F. Kennedy issues Executive Order 10925, which for the first time uses the term 'affirmative action,' requiring government contractors to take positive steps to ensure non-discrimination in employment.
President Johnson Issues Executive Order 11246
President Lyndon B. Johnson issues Executive Order 11246, prohibiting employment discrimination by federal contractors based on race, color, religion, and national origin, and mandating affirmative steps to ensure equal opportunity. This order was later amended to include sex.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke Decision
The Supreme Court rules in *Regents of the University of California v. Bakke*, upholding affirmative action as constitutional but prohibiting the use of rigid racial quotas in university admissions. Race could be considered as one factor among many.
Grutter v. Bollinger Decision
The Supreme Court, in *Grutter v. Bollinger*, upholds the University of Michigan Law School's affirmative action policy, affirming that race can be a factor in a holistic admissions process to achieve student body diversity.
Fisher v. University of Texas (Fisher I) Decision
The Supreme Court rules in *Fisher v. University of Texas*, requiring that affirmative action admissions policies be held to a standard of 'strict scrutiny,' placing the burden on universities to demonstrate the necessity and narrow tailoring of race consideration.
Fisher v. University of Texas (Fisher II) Decision
The Supreme Court again rules in *Fisher v. University of Texas*, affirming that UT Austin's race-conscious admissions policy survived strict scrutiny.
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/UNC Decision
The Supreme Court issues a landmark ruling in *Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard* and *Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina*, effectively ending race-based affirmative action in college admissions nationwide.
Executive Order 14173 Rescinds EO 11246
Executive Order 14173 is issued, rescinding Executive Order 11246 and ending race and gender-based affirmative action plan requirements for new federal contractors.
Reported Decline in Minority Enrollment Post-SFFA
Analysis by CBS News, based on Fall 2024 enrollment data, shows a decrease in underrepresented minority students at selective schools following the 2023 Supreme Court ruling.
Rise of Economic Affirmative Action Discussed
The Progressive Policy Institute highlights the growing trend of universities adopting 'economic affirmative action' as a race-neutral approach to diversity, following the ban on race-conscious admissions.
EEOC Rescinds Affirmative Action Guidelines
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) votes to rescind its 1979 Affirmative Action Guidelines and related Compliance Manual Section 607, eliminating the 'safe harbor' for voluntary affirmative action programs under Title VII.
SBA Finalizes Rule on Social Disadvantage Presumption
The Small Business Administration (SBA) finalizes a rule removing the rebuttable presumption of social disadvantage for individually owned 8(a) firms, requiring individualized assessments for claims of social disadvantage.
OFCCP Issues Final Rules Eliminating Contractor Requirements
The U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) publishes three final rules, rescinding race- and sex-based affirmative action requirements for federal contractors under EO 11246, and narrowing disability and veteran affirmative action obligations.
Follow this story
Get an email when this timeline gets a major update.
🔍Deep Dive Analysis
Affirmative Action emerged in the United States as a policy framework intended to promote equal opportunities for historically marginalized groups, particularly racial minorities and women, in employment and education. Its origins trace back to World War II, with President Franklin D. Roosevelt's executive order barring discrimination by defense contractors. The term 'affirmative action' was officially introduced by President John F. Kennedy's Executive Order 10925 in 1961, requiring government contractors to take 'affirmative action' to ensure non-discrimination. This was further expanded by President Lyndon B. Johnson's Executive Order 11246 in 1965, which mandated federal contractors to actively promote equal employment opportunity and later included sex as a protected category.
Key turning points in the legal landscape of Affirmative Action have primarily involved Supreme Court decisions. In 1978, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action but struck down the use of rigid racial quotas in university admissions, allowing race to be one of several factors. This precedent was reaffirmed in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), which upheld the University of Michigan Law School's holistic admissions policy that considered race as one factor among many to achieve a diverse student body, but noted that such policies should be limited in time. Subsequent cases like Fisher v. University of Texas (2013, 2016) further refined the 'strict scrutiny' standard applied to race-conscious admissions, requiring universities to demonstrate that such policies were narrowly tailored and necessary.
The most significant shift occurred on June 29, 2023, when the Supreme Court, in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, ruled that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This landmark decision effectively overturned Grutter v. Bollinger and Bakke, prohibiting the consideration of race as a specific factor in admissions for both public and private institutions receiving federal funds.
The consequences of the 2023 ruling have been immediate, particularly in higher education. Data from 2024 and 2025 admissions cycles indicate a noticeable decline in Black and Hispanic student enrollment at many highly selective institutions. For example, Harvard's freshman class saw a drop in Black enrollment from 18% in Fall 2023 to 14% in Fall 2024, and UNC experienced a decrease from 10.5% to 7.8%. Universities are now exploring race-neutral alternatives, such as emphasizing socioeconomic factors, first-generation status, or the impact of race on an applicant's life experiences, to maintain diversity.
Beyond higher education, federal actions in 2025 and 2026 have further reshaped the landscape of Affirmative Action. In January 2025, Executive Order 14173 rescinded Executive Order 11246, effectively ending race and gender-based affirmative action plan requirements for new federal contractors. Most recently, in June 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) voted to rescind its 1979 Affirmative Action Guidelines and related compliance manual, eliminating the long-standing 'safe harbor' for voluntary affirmative action programs under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This was followed by the U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) issuing three final rules on August 21, 2026, formally rescinding race- and sex-based affirmative action requirements for federal contractors and narrowing disability-related affirmative action obligations. These actions collectively represent a significant federal shift towards a 'color-blind' interpretation of anti-discrimination laws, drastically limiting the permissible scope of affirmative action across various sectors.
What If...?
Explore alternate histories. What if Affirmative Action made different choices?