Posted on 06/29/2009 2:32:37 PM PDT by neverdem
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday, in a case with enormous implications for workplaces across the country, that white firefighters in New Haven suffered unfair discrimination because of their race when the city scrapped the results of a promotional exam.
“The city’s action in discarding the tests violated Title VII,” the court held in a 5-to-4 decision, referring to a section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The majority said the city’s fundamental arguments were “blatantly contradicted by the record.”
Monday’s decision in Ricci v. DeStefano, No. 07-1428, came on the last day of the court’s term and was one of the most closely watched discrimination cases in years, not just for its potential to change the landscape of labor and employment law but because President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, had sided with the city and against the firefighters as a member of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Monday’s ruling is sure to be closely studied by personnel departments and their lawyers for indications of how far employers can go, and under what circumstances, in considering race in decisions on hiring and promotion. And it is sure to be a hot topic when Senate confirmation hearings begin for Judge Sotomayor on July 13.
While the case concerned public employees, the ruling is also likely to affect private employers, since Title VII of the Civil Rights Act covers private employers as well as public ones, according to Prof. Sheila Foster of Fordham Law School and other attorneys who specialize in labor and employment law.
“This decision will change the landscape of civil rights law,” said Professor Foster, who teaches anti-discrimination Law and has been involved in litigating cases under the Civil Rights Act.
Daniel P. Westman, a Washington-area lawyer who...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The headline is not literally true. Two of the screwees are Hispanic.
And this vote against government-sanctioned racism was only passed 5-4. Should have been 9-0. I would like the “dissenters” to explain their support of racism.
Artful omissions by the NYT at the top of the article leaves the reader to think the test was rigged, when just the opposite is true.
The test was designed and tested to avoid disparate impact and is widely used by other municipalities.
As the majority opinion noted, New Haven’s position was “blatently contradicted by the facts”.
The Ginsberg rant was also blatently contradicted by the facts.
Now the question to Sotomayor, if confirmed as Justice, will you uphold the principle of “stare decisis” and accept this decision as your own?
Who cares?
I think hispanics are considered "white" for racial purposes. They usually break it down as "non hispanic whites" and "hispanics".
For purposes of race whining they are a minority.
Always remember what they call the person who graduated last in their medical school class: DOCTOR
With Obamacare you will get no choice.
1. American
2. Illegal
If you selected option 2, please put this form and return to your place of origins.
No it won't. It simply invalidates the wrognful interpretation of a law whose text (and original intent) hasn't changed in over 40 years. That wrongful interpretation didn't exist when the law was made, but gradually evolved by a process of self-deception and intellectual dishonesty among "liberals," socialists and communists (most of whom won't admit that's what they are--not even to themselves--but will be unable to explain the fatal flaws of socialism, nor cite any substantative differences between socialism and what they believe.)
White is not a race. It is a color. There are many Hispanics that are a lot whiter than my Caucasian skin as there are many southeast Asians whiter than I.
Discrimination by color is not a good quality. Discrimination by race is not a good quality. Discrimination by any facet is not a good quality. The Supreme Court should be applauded for the position they have taken.
For purpose of this thread the headline is not true.
She is an average lawyer and a below average judge.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.