# Affirmative action *Government and organizational practices meant to remedy systemic discrimination; in Minnesota, the subject of Minn. Stat. § 43A.191 and of the United States' 2026 Title VII suit against the State.* Affirmative action is the general name for measures that governments and organizations use to correct systemic discrimination. Its defenders, in the United States and abroad, have argued that it narrows gaps in employment and pay, widens access to education, and advances diversity and social inclusion.[^1] The phrase entered federal usage in Executive Order 10925, which President John F. Kennedy signed on March 6, 1961.[^2] Executive Order 11246, issued September 24, 1965, made affirmative action plans, numerical goals and compliance reports conditions of federal contracting.[^3][^4] In Minnesota the concept is carried by [[Minn. Stat. § 43A.191]], *Agency affirmative action programs*, under which state agencies adopt affirmative action plans.[^5][^6] On January 14, 2026, the [[United States Department of Justice]] sued the State under [[Title VII]] in [[United States v. State of Minnesota (0:26-cv-00273)]]. The complaint cites § 43A.191 eight times.[^7] The Department announced the suit in release No. 26-21. The release's title describes the State's apparatus as "Minnesota's 'Affirmative Action' Regime."[^8] Congress used the same term in the [[Iraq Liberation Act]] of 1998, which supports efforts to remove "the regime headed by Saddam Hussein." The project's catalogue of U.S.-government "regime" usages ([[How Minnesota Got Here]], note 40) finds Minnesota the only U.S. state so described.[^9] ## Origins Executive Order 10925 directed government contractors to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed." It also required that employees be treated without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin.[^2] President Lyndon B. Johnson's [[Executive Order 11246]] required federal contractors to take "affirmative action".[^10] The National Archives codification and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's guidance set out its contractor requirements.[^3][^11] The Department of Labor's regulations implement its plans, numerical goals and compliance reports.[^4] Executive Order 14173 later partially revoked that federal-contracting framework.[^12] The [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]] barred discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Its Senate floor manager, [[Hubert Humphrey]], told the Senate the bill "would prohibit preferential treatment for any particular group." The Wikipedia account states that neither the executive orders nor the Act authorized group preferences. It adds that the practice came to be identified with preferences, goals and quotas through later Supreme Court rulings.[^1] On June 27, 1969, Arthur Fletcher announced the Philadelphia Plan, which the record describes as setting the first affirmative action goals.[^13] ## Methods of implementation The measures vary widely. They include scholarships and financial aid reserved for particular groups, outreach and advertising directed at the groups a program means to reach, and dedicated training. At the far end are loosened selection criteria for a target audience.[^1] A quota fixes a number tied to a protected characteristic, and national laws on quotas differ greatly. Where quotas are not used, members of minority groups may instead receive preference or special consideration in selection.[^1] The variant more common in Europe, called positive action, encourages underrepresented groups to enter a field rather than reserving places for them.[^1] ## By country ### United States The Supreme Court divided 4-1-4 in *Regents of the University of California v. Bakke*, decided June 28, 1978.[^14][^15] In *Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña*, decided June 29, 1995, a 5-4 Court applied strict scrutiny to federal affirmative action programs.[^16] In *Grutter v. Bollinger*, decided June 23, 2003, the Court again ruled 5-4. It sustained affirmative action in law school admissions where the program was "narrowly tailored."[^17] In *Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action*, 572 U.S. 291 (2014), the Court held that a state may prohibit race-conscious admissions by constitutional amendment.[^18] On June 29, 2023, the Court decided *Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard*. The decision effectively ended race-conscious admissions and overturned the preference in college admissions that *Grutter* had upheld.[^19][^1] The project's time table records Justice Neil Gorsuch's concurrence as linking the textualist reading of *Bostock* to Title VI.[^19] In [[Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services]], 605 U.S. 303 (2025), the Court held that Title VII's disparate-treatment provision "draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs." The Court also rejected the Sixth Circuit's heightened "background circumstances" rule for majority-group plaintiffs.[^20] ## Responses Proponents describe the policy as a path to societal equality through preferential treatment of people disadvantaged for historical reasons. Critics contend that it impedes reconciliation, trades old wrongs for new ones, and may heighten racial tension.[^1] A 2017 study examined temporary federal affirmative action regulation. It estimated that the black share of an establishment's employees rose by an average of 0.8 percentage points in the five years after regulation began, and kept rising after deregulation.[^1] ## In the Minnesota record ### Who Sources in the record disagree on when § 43A.191 was enacted. The project's validated master gives the statute's enactment citation as 1Sp1985 c 13 s 172.[^6] Time-table row TL-0386 instead records Governor [[Al Quie]] (R) signing the statute in 1981.[^21] Other time-table rows date it to 1987.[^22] Governor [[Arne Carlson]] issued [[Executive Order 91-14]] on May 3, 1991, establishing a State Affirmative Action Council.[^23] [[Tim Pawlenty]] (R) was elected governor on November 5, 2002.[^24] The project's time table counts six governors under whom the statute operated, three DFL and three Republican, and five amendments to it. The record before this article does not itemize either count.[^22] The 2026 suit was brought by the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division.[^7] Attorney General Pamela Bondi certified it as a matter of general public importance.[^8] ### What Section 43A.191 requires Minnesota state agencies to adopt affirmative action plans.[^6] [[Minnesota Management and Budget]] publishes the State's own history of its affirmative action program.[^25] The former Department of Employee Relations maintained a page on affirmative action programs.[^26] A separate statute, Minn. Stat. § 473.143, addresses affirmative action at the [[Metropolitan Council (Minnesota)]].[^27] The [[University of Minnesota]] maintains an Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action.[^28] In 1980, the Rajender matter required the University to conduct nationwide searches and to carry out internal affirmative action.[^29] The complaint in No. 0:26-cv-00273 is brought under Title VII and challenges the State's affirmative-action hiring program. It rests on the statute's text, which it cites eight times. Among the provisions it cites is subdivision 3(c), which requires an agency to explain its reason for hiring a candidate who is not an affirmative-action candidate.[^7] The release states that the certification entitles the United States to "expedited review by a three-judge district court and direct appeal to the United States Supreme Court."[^8] Keen Independent released Phase 1 of the *2017 Minnesota Joint Disparity Study* on October 10, 2017. The study was commissioned by nine public entities, among them MnDOT, the Metropolitan Council, [[Minneapolis]], St. Paul and Hennepin County. It found that women- and minority-owned businesses received 11% of procurement spending against an expected 22%. Its interviews documented "unequal access to relationships" and "stereotyping and discriminatory treatment." The full report was published March 12, 2018.[^30] ### When The complaint and the Department's release are both dated January 14, 2026.[^7][^31] The project's time table records the suit as the first federal challenge to § 43A.191.[^22] The record does not establish a ruling on the merits. As of the project's June 19, 2026 refresh, the case was pending.[^7] ### Where The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.[^7] The statute governs the affirmative action plans of Minnesota state agencies.[^6] ## See also - [[43A.191 AGENCY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS]] - [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]] - [[Executive Order 11246]] - [[Minnesota Attorney General]] - [[Minnesota]] ## Notes [^1]: Wikipedia contributors, *Affirmative action* (rev. 1381884142, retrieved Oct. 26, 2026) — definition, rationales, Origins, methods, quotas, positive action, the *Grutter*/*SFFA* summary, responses and the 2017 study. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action [^2]: Wikipedia contributors, *Executive Order 10925* (Mar. 6, 1961) — first use of "affirmative action" in a federal directive; contractor provision. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_10925 [^3]: National Archives, Office of the Federal Register, *Executive Order 11246, "Affirmative Action"* (Sept. 24, 1965) — codified text; federal-contracting framework. https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/11246.html [^4]: U.S. Department of Labor, OFCCP, *Executive Order 11246 — Regulations* (1965) — affirmative action plans, numerical goals and compliance reports. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/executive-order-11246/regulations [^5]: Justia, *Minn. Stat. § 43A.191, Agency Affirmative Action Programs* (2012 Minnesota Statutes) — statute title and text. https://law.justia.com/codes/minnesota/2012/chapter-43a/chapter-43a/section-43a.191 [^6]: Minnesota Revisor of Statutes, *Minn. Stat. § 43A.191* (current) — agency affirmative action plans; the operative statute in No. 0:26-cv-00273; the project's validated master records the enactment cite as 1Sp1985 c 13 s 172. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/43A.191 [^7]: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, *Complaint, United States v. State of Minnesota*, No. 0:26-cv-00273 (D. Minn. filed Jan. 14, 2026) — Title VII claim; cites § 43A.191 eight times, including subd. 3(c). https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1423361/dl [^8]: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, *United States Department of Justice Files Lawsuit Against Minnesota's 'Affirmative Action' Regime*, No. 26-21 (Jan. 14, 2026) — title; Attorney General's certification and expedited-review language. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-department-justice-files-lawsuit-against-minnesotas-affirmative-action-regime [^9]: U.S. Congress, *Iraq Liberation Act of 1998*, Pub. L. 105-338 (1998) — "the regime headed by Saddam Hussein"; cited in the project's catalogue of U.S.-government "regime" usages (How Minnesota Got Here, note 40). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-105publ338/pdf/PLAW-105publ338.pdf [^10]: Wikipedia contributors, *Executive Order 11246* (Sept. 24, 1965) — Johnson order requiring federal contractors to take "affirmative action". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11246 [^11]: U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, *Executive Order 11246 — Affirmative Action* (n.d.) — federal contractor affirmative action requirements. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/executive-order-11246-affirmative-action [^12]: U.S. Department of Labor, OFCCP, *Executive Order 11246* (Sept. 24, 1965) — the federal-contracting framework EO 14173 partially revoked. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/executive-order-11246 [^13]: Wikipedia contributors, *Revised Philadelphia Plan* (time-table row TL-0219, June 27, 1969) — Fletcher's announcement; first affirmative action goals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Philadelphia_Plan [^14]: U.S. Supreme Court, *Regents of the University of California v. Bakke*, 438 U.S. 265 (June 28, 1978) — 4-1-4 decision. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/438/265/ [^15]: U.S. Supreme Court, *Regents v. Bakke*, 438 U.S. 265 (1978) — race-based affirmative action limited (alternate copy). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/us/438/265/ [^16]: U.S. Supreme Court, *Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña*, 515 U.S. 200 (June 29, 1995) — strict scrutiny of federal programs, 5-4. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/515/200/ [^17]: U.S. Supreme Court, *Grutter v. Bollinger*, 539 U.S. 306 (June 23, 2003) — law school admissions upheld if "narrowly tailored," 5-4. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/306/ [^18]: U.S. Supreme Court, *Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action*, 572 U.S. 291 (2014) — states may prohibit race-conscious admissions by constitutional amendment. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/572/291/ [^19]: U.S. Supreme Court, *Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College*, No. 20-1199 (June 29, 2023) — end of race-conscious admissions; Gorsuch concurrence (time-table row TL-0922). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/600/20-1199/ [^20]: U.S. Supreme Court, *Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services*, 605 U.S. 303 (2025) — Title VII disparate treatment draws no majority/minority distinction; "background circumstances" rule rejected. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1039_c0n2.pdf [^21]: Project time table, row TL-0386, *Gov. Al Quie (R) signs §43A.191 into law* (1981) — the row's own enactment date and signer. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/43A.191 [^22]: Project time table, row TL-0934, *US v. State of Minnesota filed* (Jan. 14, 2026) — the row's 1987 operating date, six-governor and five-amendment counts, and first-federal-challenge statement. https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1423361/dl [^23]: Office of the Governor (Arne Carlson), *Executive Order 91-14* (May 3, 1991) — State Affirmative Action Council. https://www.leg.mn.gov/archive/execorders/91-14.pdf [^24]: Minnesota Secretary of State, *Historical Election Data* (Nov. 5, 2002) — Tim Pawlenty (R) elected governor (time-table row TL-0716). https://www.sos.state.mn.us/election-administration-campaigns/data-maps/historical-election-data/ [^25]: Minnesota Management and Budget, *Affirmative Action* (state laws, n.d.) — the State's affirmative action program history. https://mn.gov/mmb/employee-relations/laws-policies-and-rules/state-laws/affirmative-action/ [^26]: Minnesota Department of Employee Relations, *Affirmative Action Programs* (archived, n.d.) — DOER program page. https://mn.gov/mmb-stat/doer/ [^27]: Minnesota Revisor of Statutes, *Minn. Stat. § 473.143* (current) — Metropolitan Council affirmative action. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/473.143 [^28]: University of Minnesota, *Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action* (n.d.) — the University's compliance office. https://eoaa.umn.edu/ [^29]: University of Minnesota Conservancy, *Rajender materials* (1980) — nationwide searches and internal affirmative action required (time-table row TL-0363). https://conservancy.umn.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/2d16f45f-fd3e-49d1-8470-66693be6047f/content [^30]: Keen Independent Research, *Keen Independent releases one of the nation's largest disparity studies ever* (Oct. 10, 2017) — Phase 1 findings, commissioning entities, 11% vs. 22%, interview findings; full report Mar. 12, 2018. https://www.keenindependent.com/news/keen-independent-releases-one-nations-largest-disparity-studies-ever/ [^31]: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, *U.S. Department of Justice Files Lawsuit Against Minnesota's Affirmative Action Regime* (Jan. 14, 2026) — release date (alternate URL). https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-department-justice-files-lawsuit-against-minnesota-s-affirmative-action-regime