While I think this is a victory for those of us on the camp of common sense, one does have to look at the fine print of this decision.
At the heart of the issue are a couple of questions: What determines discriminitory? What makes, in this instance, one firefighter more able to serve as captain than another? Certainly the White and Hispanic firefighters were under the impression that this test was one way in determining this outcome but in the original decision, the lower courts ruled in opposition.
Soon to be Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in the original lower court decision that the testing processed used was discriminatory because no blacks passed the test:
"We are not unsympathetic to the plaintiffs' expression of frustration," but the firefighters who filed the case don't have a "viable" claim under the law, the opinion said. (Sonia Sotomayor in her original ruling of this case)
But in a 5-4 ruling, Justice Kennedy said that the city (New Haven, CT) violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, stating in his majority that 'The city rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white'.
As Justice Scalia wrote in his concurrence, that:
...the disparate impact standards "place a racial thumb on
the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their
policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial
outcomes"
Ginsberg, in her dissent, noted that she agreed with the lower courts ruling that the treatment of white firefighters and the dismissal of the standard test was fair, even though the only reason they threw out the outcomes was purely a racial decision...
I would like to hear your thoughts on this issue.
Grace & Peace.
PLW