Supreme Court takes up city firefighters' case
Supreme Court takes up city firefighters' case
Friday, January 9, 2009
The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Friday it would hear the reverse discrimination case brought by 20 New Haven firefighters who claimed they were denied promotion because of their race.
Nineteen white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter sued the city of New Haven in 2004 after the city threw out the results of promotion exams for lieutenant and captain. No blacks had scored well enough to get promotions, and city officials said they feared that promoting the white firefighters might have caused the low-scoring black firefighters to bring a discrimination suit.
The suit, Ricci v. DeStefano, has gone through several appeals. Most recently, a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s decision to dismiss the case. In a 7-6 vote, the full 2nd Circuit declined to rehear the case.
Karen Torre, the attorney representing the firefighters, said in a statement that “while we cannot predict what the outcome of the Supreme Court review will be, we hope that this case will restore the civil service to what it should be: a public work force of the very best chosen on the basis of individual merit, free of the divisive politics of race.”
City Hall issued a statement saying it looks forward to presenting its case to the Court.
“While the City is not surprised that the Supreme Court decided to grant cert in this case, it remains confident that the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals correctly decided the issue,” the statement said.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the case in April.
Comments
None 3 years, 1 month ago
sigh
It's a reference to Orwell's Animal Farm: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
A proclamation by the pigs who control the government, the quot is a comment on the hypocrisy of governments that proclaim the absolute equality of their citizens but give power and privileges to a small elite.
And so goes Western Civ, yet another degenerative step down.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
I love, Loved, LOVED this!
[Title VII] prohibits using tests that have a disparate impact on ANY [group]"
Yeah, you know, such racialist groups as the literate, the numerate, the studious, the conscientious, the high-scoring, and the like.
Given that--obviously--one CAN create a test that has "disparate impact" on SOME groups, I eagerly await (and have been for years) the test that actively skew AGAINST the majority oppressor class. Let me know when you have one, so I can, uh, STUDY for it!
None 3 years, 1 month ago
"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.'"
...and not that some are "more equal than others."
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Let's hear it for Dr. King! May we all remember--and someday understand--exactly what he was wishing for!
None 3 years, 1 month ago
I love the idea of being "more equal." What does that even mean? I am more neither-better-nor-worse-than-anyone-else than you!
None 3 years, 1 month ago
Correct me if I’m wrong, but usually the U.S. Solicitor General (and by proxy the White House) pick a side when it comes to Supreme Court cases challenging federal law. So what will Obama do? Try to uphold the racial preference machinery which he himself said he benefited from, and alienate plenty of whites who voted for him? Or recommend striking it down, and alienate the tremendous number of blacks who voted for him?
Either way, the firefighers will win 5-4, and you can kiss the gravy train goodbye.
Change is coming indeed.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
I'd just like to point out that the New Haven Fire Department has a long and colorful history of throwing out test results that pick the "wrong" firefighters. Tests given by the department to choose which firefighters to hire are also routinely thrown out when they pick a firefighter class with which the brass is unhappy - and these tests even include a subjective interview (where "desirable" candidates can be given extra points)! I've been told that these admissions tests are often thrown out because too many cousins/children/uncles/half-brothers/friends etc. of influential firefighters don't make the cut. Testing is kind of a sham at the NHFD.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
If "One of 20" is one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, I obviously sympathize with your frustration that you worked hard on a test that you say was "fair, valid and provided the 'best' candidates for the job," but then the city decided not to use it b/c they didn't want to promote an all-white group of Lieutenants, and/or thought they would be hit by a lawsuit if they did. It doesn't look like the Civil Service Board agreed with you about how "fair" and "valid" and capable of finding the "best" firefighters the test was -- or at the very least, the Board must have concluded that there was a "less discriminatory alternative" that was valid, since they declined to certify the test results. But I have no inside knowledge here. Maybe the Board was wrong and you are right.
I certainly understand that you want to win your case. It must be very frustrating to have the test thrown out by the Civil Service Board AFTER you took it.
But looking at the bigger picture, the problem with what will happen around the country if the Supreme Court overturns the lower courts and rules for the plaintiffs, is that in the future, cities really will be "damned if they do, damned if they don't." If they use a test and end up with an all-white class, they'll get slapped with a lawsuit by the people who got excluded. If they decide NOT to use the test, they'll get slapped with a lawsuit like yours. What is the City supposed to do? You can't just say, "just pick a test and don't worry about whether it has a 'disparate impact' on one group or another." That's clearly illegal. This is going to be a minefield of lawsuits stretching endlessly into the future if you win.
One thing that's not reported here that I'd be curious about is what actually happened in the aftermath of this lawsuit. Did the City end up using a different test instead for promotions? Are the positions still vacant today? Did there turn out to be a "less discriminatory alternative" test that was valid?
None 3 years, 1 month ago
The real question here is: was the Civil Service Board legitimately trying to avoid a lawsuit by jettisoning a test they wouldn't be able to defend in court? Or was it, as 'One of 20' and the complaint say, more of a political thing where the Mayor and whoever else leaned hard on the board behind the scenes to throw out the test even though it was valid and there was no "less discriminatory alternative"? Unfortunately the Supreme Court is not going to answer that question. They don't rejudge facts. They take the factual findings of the court below, which found that there was no race-based conspiracy, just a legit attempt to avoid getting sued. (Which obviously didn't work out so well, did it!) So now those are the facts in the record. That means that if the Supreme Court goes the plaintiffs' way, on those facts, we'll see litigation as far as the eye can see. From now on, if you ever change up a test to avoid getting sued by one group, you can then automatically be sued by another group. It's almost like a guaranteed full-employment program for employment lawyers. Awesome.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
"reverse discrimination":
thank you for explaining the case. it was too complicated for me.
I'm well aware of what "reverse discrimination" is used to describe, and my argument stands. It is a loaded term. The firefighters are bringing a "discrimination" case against the department.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
This site has in links to the brief's and opinions on this case. http://www.newhaven20.com/
None 3 years, 1 month ago
It is ok... They were just White...
None 3 years, 1 month ago
As Whites increasingly shrink in numbers, they can expect alot more discrimination.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
What this case is actually about is whether New Haven is allowed to try to comply with the law (Title VII). That law prohibits using tests that have a disparate impact on ANY race (blacks, whites, whoever), unless the test has a "business necessity" and is "job related." In other words, to put it in layman's terms, if the test is going to shut out or seriously impact one racial group or another, it had better be a good test that actually predicts who is going to be a good firefighter.
Lots of tests employers use don't meet that threshold: they don't predict performance. When you've got a test like that, and the results are racially skewed in a massive way (against any race), then you probably are vulnerable to a disparate impact lawsuit by that group, especially if we're taking about a field like police or firefighting where all the communities in the city want some of their people to get hired. Here, the city decided to throw out its test results and start over. That was the right decision IF the city in fact couldn't justify using the test as having any business necessity / being job related.
If the Supreme Court overturns the Second Circuit and rules for the firefighters, the result will be a massive mess and and unbelievable flood of litigation, as any employer trying to comply with Title VII gets slapped with this kind of reverse-discrimination lawsuit by whites -- or by whatever racial group scores highly on any test that the employer doesn't use or throws out or whatever.
Hopefully the YDN will manage to do some more nuanced reporting on this story when the Court actually hears the case and the result comes down.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
So the term "reverse discrimination" tells us a little bit about the person who uses it. Given the benefit of the doubt, the person who uses said term has heard it used before and thought nothing of it. The writer might not have intended what "reverse discrimination" really means. By introducing "reverse," the speaker/writer grants "discrimination" a rather non-neutral directionality. S/he says that "discrimination" is naturally whites discriminating against minority groups. "Reverse discrimination" implies something out of the natural order, but discrimination is anything but natural.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
I think 'tucker' is confused. "reverse discrimination" doesn't mean discrimination against whites. It means calling anti-discrimination efforts, like affirmative action, "discrimination."
Let me spell it out for you. Say a liberal arts college gets a lot of female applicants, but wants about equal numbers of men and women. They'll practice some affirmative action benefiting men, as most liberal arts colleges now do. If women sued about that, or complained about that, or whatever, they would be making a "reverse discrimination" claim.
The firefighter's lawsuit here is "reverse" discrimination not because they're white, but because they're claiming that the city's anti-discrimination efforts (throwing out a test that turned out to have a discriminatory disparate impact) are discriminating against them.
None 3 years, 1 month ago
"This case stinks"- I can tell you that the test that was given was fair, valid and provided the "best" candidates for the job. Maybe you could come by and witness this for yourself. The test was far from skewed against a particular group, who would that be in your opinion anyway?--anyone who is not a white male? I'm glad your only concern is a deluge of lawsuits against gov. & municipalities. Your main concern should be not getting gov. & municipal agencies in this position in the first place. Here's how--stop voting in politicians who are crooks and liars, and who are only motivated by votes not right & wrong. Then, give fair & valid tests and certify the results. New Haven Politicians have a long standing tradition of doing the "wrong" thing( as they did with this test.) This is evidenced by the past few years of lawsuits that have been lost by the city. Title VII does not grant any minority a "right" to a job over a white male, it allows a level playing field so everyone has the same shot. This test was fair & valid, everyone had the same shot, so it should have been certified regardless of the results. 2 courts of "far left liberals" (Judge Arterton--Liberal & Judge Sotomayer--an Obama hopeful to the US Supreme Court) made decisions that were anything but fair--there should of at least been a jury trial. The city has no proof of a better test, or proof of tests with better results. The best barometer of candidates for fire officers right now are these tests--unless you would like us to do live burns & other calls; in which case, I would welcome that, and it would show that this test did provide the best candidates to protect the citizens of New Haven. Remember--Judge me by the content of my character not by the color of my skin (apparently only works one way.)
Or login with:
OpenID