Subscribe by RSS
The Supreme Court of the United States dealt an embarrassing blow to the Obama administration and their Supreme Court nominee Justice Sonia Sotomayor today by overturning one of her lower decisions.
The WaPo reports:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has ruled that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.
New Haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results, the court said Monday in a 5-4 decision. The city said that it had acted to avoid a lawsuit from minorities.
The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide, potentially limiting the circumstances in which employers can be held liable for decisions when there is no evidence of intentional discrimination against minorities.
“Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer’s reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions,” Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his opinion for the court. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters “understandably attract this court’s sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them.”
Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens signed onto Ginsburg’s dissent, which she read aloud in court Monday.
Inexplicably, Sotomayor tried to bury this case and prevent it from moving on to the Supreme Court. Her decision was terribly wrong to begin with and I’m glad justice has prevailed for these firefighters in Connecticut.
The Hartford Courant has more on the background of this case if you’re unfamiliar:
The 20 plaintiffs in Ricci, one of whom is identified as both Hispanic and white, claim that the city’s decision to scrap the examination results before any promotions were made violated their rights to be employed in an environment free from racial classification.
All 20 plaintiffs would have qualified for promotion had the test, which the city purchased for $100,000 from a consultant, been used by the city civil service board. No blacks scored high enough to qualify for promotion. The test was divided between written and oral questions.
The city administered the test to 118 candidates, 27 of whom were black. None of the black candidates scored high enough to qualify for 15 immediately available promotions. After a series of raucous meetings, the city civil service board decided to scrap the examination results and promote no one. In subsequent litigation, the city suggested the test was racially biased. It said the decision to scrap the results was “race neutral” because it disadvantaged no one group of test takers more than another.
Karen Lee Torre, the New Haven lawyer who sued on behalf of the firefighters in 2004, reacted sharply to the suggestion that the test was biased. During oral argument, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. remarked sarcastically that the only criticism of the test came from an executive with a competing test preparation firm. The competitor testified at a civil service hearing in New Haven that, even though he had not read the test, he thought he could have designed a better one, Alito pointed out.
“The only thing wrong with the test is that it didn’t suit the political agenda of the mayor of New Haven,” Torre has said. Her reference to Mayor John DeStefano refers to an element of the lawsuit that has been little heard from since the case reached the lofty, legal realm of the Supreme Court.
One of the white firefighter claims is that DeStefano jettisoned the promotional exam to satisfy influential, black political supporters who were pushing for a greater black presence in the fire department’s officer ranks.
Analysts have said Ricci embodies a number of firsts. It is viewed as the most important race and hiring case of the high court’s current term and some speculated it could reshape hiring and promotion policy affecting millions in government and private industry.
President Barack Obama’s nominee for the high court, Sonia Sotomeyor, twice ruled for New Haven and against the white firefighters as a member of the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. Conservative critics of her nomination have been reviewing her role in the case.
Ricci also is the first case to broadly raise the issue of race and the workplace under the leadership Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. And it is the court’s first examination of race since Obama’s election.
The Obama administration took its first stand on race and civil rights when weighed in once Ricci reached the Supreme Court. The administration sided with New Haven, saying the city was justified in dropping the test if it determined the test had “gross exclusionary effects on minorities.” But it urged the high court to send the case back to U.S. District Judge Janet Bond Arterton in New Haven for trial to allow the 20 plaintiffs an opportunity to argue that the city acted with a discriminatory motive.
There were no “gross exclusionary effects on minorities” as the administration alleges, that is total nonsense. This case is all about playing to the liberal constituents. Had all minorities passed the exam, there wouldn’t even have been a case. This all comes down to merit and whether we should truly be judged on our character, not our color as Dr. Matin Luther King, Jr. espoused.
The Department was afraid of being sued because not enough minorities passed the exam, though everyone taking the exam had the same opportunities and the same learning material before the test. The men who passed had simply done their homework and were prepared for this exam yet the city scrapped the test fearing racial repercussions.
How ironic that Sotomayor’s record of being overturned has grown while she’s still in the nomination process to sit on the bench of the very court which overturned her.
Sotmayor should be embarrassed at this ruling as should the Obama administration. For everyone else, it is nothing but good news as the SCOTUS reaffirmed some semblance of a meritocracy in this country.
Read the full decision here: RICCI ET AL. v. DESTEFANO ET AL. (PDF)
Visit the You Decide Politics Store »
Loading ...
““Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer’s reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions”
Years ago I took, passed and qualified to be choices among 50 for Missouri Highway Patrol. I outed out after seeing the physical exercise program.
Few years later I put in again and was denied. Reason given, only minority and women allowed in upcoming class. I understand it and thought nothing of it. America was going through period of righting past wrongs. Officers were at least 6′2″ and white male on force.
This case was not racial or minority issue. In my city Fire fighters are mixed. % I do not know.
I am for best person for job. I would not give points to Vets, race, or sex. If they still do that.
Fear of law suite should be a thing of the past if all things for choice is equal and fair…
I am wondering how an examination can be biased. Was the test not using questions that were geared towards being a firefighter? I am curious to see a sample examination. I man perhaps the type of exam that you take to be promoted in fire fighting is different from EMT/Paramedic Board Exam that is given to firefighters aside for doing the very short Fire Academy. If the exam is similar to the board exams that you take to become certified then it can not be biased. They ask you questions based on the material learn in EMT/Medic school. They are all question based on what you do in various situations that will be thrown at you in the line of duty.
A good addition to this article would be to try to find and post a sample exam.
As far as this being a liberal thing is beyond me. If it’s an issue where people were trying to get more black people promoted it’s liberal. So does that mean when it’s trying to find justice for white people it’s conservative. That’s a dangerous avenue that makes it appear that
Democratics are liberals and black people advocates and left winged, and blue
Republicans are conservatives and white people advocates and right winged, and red
That seems like an obsessively long list of labels for groups of people.
How about we call this an issue of the particular fire department looking to have more diversity in their business. Then particular judges making a ruling based on the law and the constitution.
I honestly thought we scrapped Affirmative Action. Then again applications do still ask the person race don’t they? I don’t recall. Perhaps that’s how Obama got the job?
I tried to find sample exams for promotion within the firefighter career but all I could find are examinations for initial hiring and exams for actual EMT/Paramedic/Firefighter board exam questions.
http://74.125.47.132/sear.....&gl=us
I do believe there are still racial tensions between blacks and whites. I can’t begin to know if this has a profound effect on employment and promotional opportunities.
I will go on record saying that it does makes sense that minorities know a bit more about being discriminated against. The only way that I can see that meaning anything as a Supreme Court Judge is that a judge must be sure to use the law to best of your ability to prevent discrimination.
The following link is one to a list of polls on racism in the united states.
The various categories include:
is there national widespread racism against blacks in the US
is there national widespread racism against whites in the US
How this racism affects black, including four options
The results are what one would expect except for the last category.
The last one groups voting based on political party. They ask Democrats, Independants, and Republicans if they believe there is widespread racism against whites, than blacks. What I find shocking is that Republicans believe that there is more racism against white than there is racism against blacks in the US.
http://www.gallup.com/pol.....pread.aspx
Wow that is rather shocking to me. So whites are the targeted ones now? ‘
What I believe may be more true than this assumption is that whites have shown racism so much over the history of the US that they may be more watched and/or suspected of racism.
One can not deny that racism is still widespread in the US. From both ends.
I see whites showing hatred of blacks due to parental and/or peer influence. I also see it due to the behavior of some black influencing the hatred of all blacks.
I see blacks showing hatred of whites for the exact same reasons.
I’ve also seen plenty of blacks and whites displaying hatred for the opposite amongst their family and peers yet hiding it around those they hate when they are together. This sometimes appear to me that these people do not actually hate the opposite race yet they feel it is necessary to act as though they do when they are around their peers and/or family. Then there are those who simply hide it due to feer of persecution.
I was born to a Caucasian mother and African American father. Black and Whites seem to feel comfortable talking to me about their hatred for the opposite race while appearing to call themselves my friends. I’ve lived in predominantly white and at other times predominantly black communities. Both have shown me profound racism. I have been shown racism against me from both communities throughout my life.
So, if this racism does exists, and people show it with the polling, can we assume that this racism effects the workplace?
Huffington Post
At least 7% of those polled would be upset by a black family living next to where they lived, 10% would be upset by a black person being President of the United States and 25% of those polled are upset by black leaders asking for racial equality in the workplace. Of whites polled, 48% felt the word “violent” described black people moderately, very or extremely well, 57% shared those sentiments about the word “complaining”, 38% felt that way about “lazy” and 40% thought “irresponsible” was a good descriptor.
http://www.huffingtonpost.....27998.html
Interesting. So if these people have a negative few of black people, would that effect their interest in giving promotions to black people at work, or would they rather see the white counterpart be promoted?
More on racism at the workplace
http://chattahbox.com/us/.....ist-email/
(ChattahBox)—Yet, another Republican feels free to attack the dignity of our presidential office with vile hate and racism. In what has become an almost daily occurrence in Republican circles, a staffer for Tennessee State Senator Diane Black sent out a racist email last month, demeaning President Obama, using her work computer and state email account .
The Republican staffer’s name is Sherri Goforth and she emailed a racial smear against President Obama to a long list of recipients, including co-workers. The email was entitled, “Historical Keepsake Photo,” and included a picture of all of our 44 presidents, except that President Obama’s portrait only contained two white eyes against a black background.
You would think that after her disgusting racial smear was revealed, Sherri Goforth would be suitably apologetic, humiliated and shamed. But that’s not the case, not at all. She doesn’t comprehend how reprehensible her actions were.
When asked about the racist email, Goforth was only sorry that her racism was made public and she showed no remorse. She was only sorry she sent the email smear to the “wrong list.”
“I went on the wrong email and I inadvertently hit the wrong button,” “I’m very sick about it, and it’s one of those things I can’t change or take back,” said Goforth to a reporter from the online site, Nashville is Talking.
Twice, NIT asked Goforth if she understood the controversial nature of the email and both times, she responded she was sorry about sending the racist smear to the wrong list. Apparently the “right list,” included recipients who were sure to appreciate Goforth’s racial “joke.”
Her supervisor, Sen. Diane Black, the chair of the Senate Republican Caucus, has seen fit to only reprimand Goforth and take no further action for the racist attack of our President.
Tennessee Democratic Party Chair Chip Forrester, condemned the hateful smear and is calling on Sen. Black to publicly condemn the racist email and fire Goforth. “…[O]nce again, a Tennessee Republican has earned national attention for a racist, hate-filled attack on our President,” said Forrester.
This is not the first instance of racist attacks against President Obama by Tennessee Republicans. Former Tennessee, Republican Party Chairman Chip Saltsman sent out the “Barack the Magic Negro” song as a “gift” to Republican National Committee members, during his bid to head the Committee
Just yesterday, it was reported that a South Carolina Republican activist, Rusty DePass, compared an escaped gorilla to our First Lady, Michelle Obama.
I do realize not “every” Republican thinks and behaves like the Sherri Goforths and Chip Saltsmans of this world. However, unless decent Republicans vigorously condemn the racial smears of our President, people like Sherri Goforth will continue to be the face of the Republican Party.
“One can not deny that racism is still widespread in the US.”
I will deny that there is institutional racism in the US like there was in the 1900s.
There are racist people of all stripes who hate one particular group for whatever reason, this knows no boundary.
However, to say that everyone does not have equal opportunity or equal protection under the law in this country is absurd. Case and point, look at Obama. In fact, some groups now have more protection under the law than others, which is wrong since justice should be blind.
There will always be racist people, that can’t be changed by civil rights laws. It can only be fought by communication and calling people out when they espouse racist views, in any direction.
Also, the Ricci case is political in nature because it was based on liberal political correctness that the test, which was not racist in any way at all, was scrapped. The results didn’t meet the city’s desire for “diverse” results. It’s sickening and it is, indeed, discrimination of the highest form. Would it be different if all minorities passed the course and the city thought not enough Caucasians passed so they scrapped it? No way! I’d still be arguing the same thing, that people should advance on their merit, not their skin tone.
We need to get back to the basics of meritocracy, succeed and fail on your own merits, not your race.
Hahah.. that woman isn’t the face of the party, she’s some wacko who needs to be fired. I’ve never even heard of her before you posted this. She’s a nobody. Liberals want to make her the face of the party, that’s about it.
The “Barack the Magic Negro” was from a Los Angeles Times columnist who called him that. He was a liberal columnist saying Obama wasn’t “black” enough. In fact, here is the link:
http://www.latimes.com/ne.....5087.story
Rush Limbaugh made a parody of it since apparently liberals can make racial remarks about Obama and it’s acceptable. That one is a debunked non-incident.
Tell me, how about these people at anti-war demonstrations burning President Bush in effigy:
Is there not hatred there? It exists and can come from any direction.
As far as I have witnessed, I have not seen Obama burned in effigy at any Tea Party.
Racism exists, in some respects, since certain organizations make money off of its existence. It helps them financially to cry racism every 2 seconds about every issue, even when there is no evidence of racism. They look for situations where different races are involved so they can make a case for racism.
Racism exists, in some respects, since certain organizations make money off of its existence. It helps them financially to cry racism every 2 seconds about every issue, even when there is no evidence of racism. They look for situations where different races are involved so they can make a case for racism.
I will 100% agree with that. It’s usually those same people you speak of that abuse government aid.
I posted that article and a long list of racism that still exists, I did not mean to label the republican party, I simply cut and pasted the article.
I agree, people should be rewarded for merit and not race. My point was if racism still exists, whose to say a racist is not in charge of promoting anyone in a business? Racist people do have jobs and I am sure they exist at every level of businesses. I am not asking for affirmative action, only fairness.
I agree, it is up to those who feel they have been discriminated against to call out the racist party. What could potentially happen here is when there is an actual case of discrimination, it may be brushed off as another person crying wolf like those you spoke of in the comment I quoted you on. All we can do is hope that all accusations are given it’s due attention.
I myself may have faced discrimination but I do not believe I have ever lost out on career opportunities because of it, that I know of, but I do feel sorry for anyone who does face such a thing and I will stand by them if their claim is true.
I have never been a Bush hater either. I actually did the research to find the humanitarian things that he has done in other countries, including many countries in Africa where he appears to have been welcomed with open arms. The only negative thing I can come up with for Bush is spending so much money of foreign wars. Though I do not doubt something needed to be done and I back him on taking action. I would like to have seen countries other than our own contributing financially to the cause.
As I believe you will agree Nate, we have, and have had, our own financial burdens to take care of, and spending 100’s of billions of dollars that we don’t actually have is bad for the economy.
As I said about Obama, Bush could not make moves without the backing of congress, so how on earth can I put all blame on him for anything.
Anyone burning Bush is obviously a nutter. As well as that republican staffer woman. You have never seen me argue that Republicans are bad, and you never will, but I will call them like I see them, that goes for everyone, as I do not care for the labeling Republican or Democrat.
I can’t say that I know what was on that test that the firefighters took, but as I said before, I’d love to see a sample exam that is used solely for the purposes of career advancement in that said career.
Agreed.
It is not uncommon for Supreme Court Justices to have had their rulings overturned before they were made into Supreme Court Justices.
Personally, I don’t like that our Justices are in it for life and that they are not voted in. However, I see the pros and cons to both sides.
“Group Sotomayor belonged to sued over job tests”
WASHINGTON –” A civil rights group advised by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in the 1980s brought several discrimination lawsuits that sought to scrap the results of job tests because too few Hispanics scored well, according to new documents that are fueling GOP criticism of the judge.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/a....._documents
Congratulations to them, fighting for what you believe in is a a virtue. Being able to fight for what you believe in is one of the things that makes this country great.
“fighting for what you believe in is a a virtue.”
vir·tue
1 a : conformity to a standard of right : morality b : a particular moral excellence.
Congress debate will decide if Ricci will become Supreme Court Judge. Supreme Court decides the legality under the Constitution.
Virtue is nice. In its day and I hope each person has.
KKK had conformity to ‘a standard of right’ in its day. Constitutionally, it did not.
It s not a vitue to force a less qualified person to get a job as RN because higher qualified applicant is over-weight.
Downplay someone’s given right to take something to court if your want to salty pants, but it’s their right to do so, and that is what makes our country great, whether Bill says so or not.
Sorry I got political on you ?
Salty pants. Name calling…
“Downplay someone’s given right to take something to court”
A twist of my comment. Quote where I said this.
does anyone have a link to sample questions from the exam
Bob,
I wish.