At the beginning of our involvement in World War II, just a year after A. Philip Randolph threatened his march on Washington, Mark Ethridge, the liberal publisher of the Louisville Courier-Journal commented at a Fair Employment Practices Commission hearing, “No white Southerner can logically challenge the statement that the Negro is entitled, as an American citizen, to full civil rights and to economic opportunity.” But, he continued, Northerners “must recognize that there is no power in the world—not even in all the mechanized armies of the earth, Allied and Axis—which could now force the Southern white people to the abandonment of the principle of social segregation.”

In 1942 that outlook was considered realistic, and segregation was considered fair. A poll taken two years later asked, “Do you think Negroes should have as good a chance as white people to get any kind of job, or do you think white people should have the first chance at any kind of job?” Only 44 percent thought that blacks should have equal opportunity.

Fortunately, America has moved light years past those traditional assumptions—and nowhere is that more apparent than in race relations. After the civil rights and women's liberation movements, most citizens began to accept a different interpretation of fairness. An “underlying assumption of the rule of law,” wrote Justice Powell in Bakke, “is the worthiness of a system of justice based on fairness to the individual,” and that meant to every citizen.

This fundamental shift came about because of protests that revealed inequality in American society, a governmental response in the form of civil rights laws and equal employment and affirmative action regulations, and a positive reaction from most universities, local governments, and businesses.

The vast majority of citizens today support the ideals of equal opportunity, and as the nation began the new millennium the federal government, most states, many universities, and the private sector continued various affirmative action programs.

Since Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act it has been illegal to discriminate in employment, and the watchdog has been the EEOC. Its guidelines pertain to all employers—public, private, or nonprofit. The 1964 act concerned employers with more than 25 employees, which the 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act reduced to 15 workers. Since the 1991 Civil Rights Act all victims of discrimination and sexual harassment at the hands of such employers have the right to a jury trial and, if victorious, can collect punitive and compensatory damages, which are capped depending on the size of the firm. Almost every year during the 1990s the agency received about 80,000 complaints. During the 2002 budget year, for example, the EEOC received over 84,000 complaints, prompting chairwoman Cari Dominguez to explain that the increase probably was a result of the slow economy, aging baby boomers, and a multinational workforce. Complaints most often alleged discrimination because of age, national origin, and religion, especially against Islam after September 11. The previous year the agency obtained record-breaking monetary benefits of almost $250 million for victims. Clearly, discrimination and harassment remain persistent problems in the American workplace.

The OFCCP oversees more than 400,000 corporations that have federal contracts of more than $50,000, covering about 40 percent of the private sector workforce. Those contractors have to file an affirmative action plan that “commits itself to apply every good faith effort” to “ensure equal employment opportunity, ” and many states have similar policies. If contractors do not abide by the policy, the federal government can bar them from contracts, which is rare; only five firms were banned during the Clinton years.

Congress legislated set-asides in 1998 with the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program, and many cities now have their own programs, which federal courts upheld in Adarand v. Mineta.

Tax-supported public institutions and universities must have affirmative action policies, as must private ones if they accept tax funds in allocations or grants, and the Michigan cases decided that they could use race as one of many factors in admissions. At the same time, however, Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in Grutter probably was correct: the decisions will not end “the controversy and the litigation.” As one attorney wrote, “The major risk now for higher education is that the yellow light the Supreme Court lit…will be mistaken for green.”

Private businesses continue many voluntary programs. In fact, most national corporations realized during the civil rights movement that they had an obligation to train and hire African Americans, and so they began instituting their own programs. During the 1970s other businesses feared violation of Title VII and subsequent lawsuits, and during the decade which boosted ethnic awareness and women's liberation, business leaders had no desire to be labeled racist or sexist. By the Reagan backlash, then, corporations had affirmative action programs in place, were declaring them successful, and had no intention of reversing course. The diversity movement, expanding immigration, and the global market during the 1990s solidified business support for affirmative action. In 2003 Procter & Gamble was one of thirty major corporations to file an amicus brief supporting the University of Michigan. The Fortune 25 company noted that 2.5 billion people in 75 countries purchase its products every year. “Our success as a global company is a direct result of our diverse and talented workforce, ” stated the chairman of the board. “Our ability to develop new consumer insights and ideas … is the best possible testimony to the power of diversity.” Simply put, a Bank One spokesperson stated, “diversity is good business.” After the Grutter decision, Business Week declared, “Corporate America won a big victory.”

Yet affirmative action has little or no impact on many citizens, including those employees of small companies that do not contract with government. These businesses, services ranging from cutting hair to mowing lawns or building homes, can hire and promote whomever they wish and do not have to meet any standards for race or gender diversity in their workforces—and they make up about half of all American companies. Moreover, with the exception of the federal workforce, gay and lesbians are not protected. In 1974, at the beginning of the gay liberation movement, some members of Congress submitted a bill aimed to adding the term “sexual orientation” to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Although a few states did that, the federal government never passed the amendment, meaning that there is no federal law that protects gays and lesbians from employment discrimination.

But generally speaking, affirmative action and equal opportunity practices are followed by most businesses, universities, and public agencies. In 1989 critic Abigail Thernstrom admitted that affirmative action had become “so institutionalized” that court decisions would have little effect. That certainly was the case on most campuses after the Michigan cases. Just weeks after the decision, representatives of almost 50 public and private universities met and discussed ways “to shield raceconscious admissions policies against future legal challenges.” Affirmative action in some form has become part of the American way of life and in that sense is fulfilling Martin Luther King's Dream.