« Auto Workers strike would trigger bailout default | Main | No-match letter no-discussion rule was unfair labor practice »
US Supreme Court takes Title VII case on municipality's refusal to implement promotion exam results
January 09, 2009 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo
Ricci v. DeStefano (07-1428 and 08-328)
Certiorari granted January 9, 2009
Details, briefs: http://www.lawmemo.com/supreme/case/Ricci/
The New Haven, Connecticut fire department administered civil service tests for applicants for positions as captain and lieutenant. The examination resulted in disproportionately higher scores for white applicants than for minority applicants. The department decided not to implement the exam results for fear that doing so would put them in violation of Title VII. Therefore, positions remained unfilled.
A group of white and Hispanic applicants sued claiming a violation of Title VII and of the equal protection clause. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants, and the 2nd Circuit affirmed.
Two petitions for certiorari were filed. Both were granted.
Questions presented in 07-1428:
This case presents recurring issues regarding proper application of Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause to the civil service. Petitioners, New Haven fire fighters and lieutenants, qualified for promotion to command positions pursuant to jobrelated examinations and merit selection rules mandated by local law. Citing the race of the successful candidates and Title VII's "disparate impact" provision, city officials refused to promote the petitioners.
1. When an otherwise valid civil service selection process yields unintended racially disproportionate results, may municipalities reject the results and the successful candidates for reasons of race absent the demonstration required by 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(k)?
2. Does 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(1) which makes it unlawful for employers "to adjust the scores of, use different cutoff scores for, or otherwise alter the results of, employment related tests on the basis of race ... ," permit employers to refuse to act on the results of such tests for reasons of race?
3. If, citing the public interest in eradicating political patronage, racism and corruption in civil service, a state's highest court mandates strict compliance with local laws requiring race-blind competitive merit selection procedures, does 42 U.S.C. §2000e-7 permit federal courts to relieve municipalities from compliance with such laws?
Questions presented in 08-328:
This case presents the question whether Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause allow a government employer to reject the results of a civil-service selection process because it does not like the racial distribution of the results. Specifically:
1. When a content-valid civil-service examination and race-neutral selection process yield unintended racially disproportionate results, do a municipality and its officials racially discriminate in violation of the Equal Protection Clause or Title VII when they reject the results and the successful candidates to achieve racial proportionality in candidates selected?
2. Does an employer violate 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(/), which makes it unlawful for employers "to adjust the scores of, use different cutoff scores for, or otherwise alter the results of, employment related tests on the basis of race," when it rejects the results of such tests because of the race of the successful candidates?
|
Editor: Ross Runkel, Professor of Law Emeritus. email Ross@LawMemo.Com, Phone 503-399-8028. Copyright LawMemo, Inc.
