Supreme Court backs New Haven Firefighters

[starang21]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/...ion/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court sided Monday with white firefighters in a workplace discrimination lawsuit, a divisive case over the role race should play in job advancement.
The Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling backed firefighters in a reverse discirmination case Monday.

In the split 5-4 vote, a majority of the justices ruled that the city of New Haven, Connecticut, improperly threw out the results of promotional exams that officials said left too few minorities qualified.

One Latino and no African-American firefighters qualified for promotion based on the exam; the city subsequently decided not to certify the results and issued no promotions.

A group of 20 mostly white firefighters sued, claiming reverse discrimination.

High court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor heard the case on her federal appeals court last year and sided with the city.

The Supreme Court was being asked to decide whether there was a continued need for special treatment for minorities, or whether enough progress has been made to make existing laws obsolete, especially in a political atmosphere where an African-American occupies the White House.

"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," wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy for the majority.
Don't Miss

The case has received added attention because Sotomayor was on the appellate court that dismissed the appeal of one Latino and 19 white firefighters.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel that ruled in February 2008 to uphold a lower court decision supporting New Haven's move to throw out the results.

In June 2008, Sotomayor was part of a 7-6 majority that denied a rehearing of the case by the full court.

Legal analysts said they expect Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee will want to ask Sotomayor about her role in that case as well as her comments about ethnicity and the bench.

[DrPhil]

I can see both sides of the issue. I think the court did what makes sense and sets a good precedent given the context.

The test wasn't deemed discriminatory by intent. It was exclusionary by outcome.

The fire department probably should have kept the test results and studied them by race in order to impliment changes for the future. Throwing the test results out wasn't a good idea.

[Kevin]

I haven't read the opinion, but this was kind of an expected ruling. Very much like Washington v. Davis in the facts and outcome.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I can see both sides of the issue. I think the court did what makes sense and sets a good precedent given the context.

I agree.

The test wasn't deemed discriminatory by intent. It was exclusionary by outcome.

What do you mean by this? I don't understand. I mean, I can see where the test was not meant to be discriminatory, but how was the outcome exclusionary, based on race, I presume?

[starang21]

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

but how was the outcome exclusionary, based on race, I presume?

no black firefighters and only one latino fire fighters got promoted.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by starang21

no black firefighters and only one latino fire fighters got promoted.

NO. No one got promoted because no black firefighters and only one latino fire fighter scored well enough to be promoted.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...in;contentBody

One of the things that's interesting to me about this is that at one point someone tried to review the test to see what was biased about the questions asked. I'm trying to find a link to the results.

I can't find the article I remember reading but this discusses some of the issues:http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/news...e=1&cat=&more=

[starang21]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

NO. No one got promoted because no black firefighters and only one latino fire fighters scored well enough to be promoted.

well, yea. ok, the reason i stated was the reason the test got thrown out initially.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by starang21

well, yea. ok, the reason i stated was the reason the test got thrown out initially.

No it wasn't, because like UGAalum94 says, no one got promoted.

The test results were thrown out because (again, as UGAalum94 says) no black firefighters and only one latino fire fighters scored well enough to be promoted to begin with, leading the city to believe that if it certified and relied on the test results, the city would be open to a lawsuit claiming that the test was unfair to non-whites. So instead, they got a lawsuit from the employees who would have been promoted had the test results been certified.

[Little32]

I was waiting for someone to post about this.

Like DrPhil, I can see both sides of the issue; it goes to the context in which the test is administered as well as to the test itself. Also, listening to NPR today, they said that the scores were canceled primarily to preempt a lawsuit from the black and latino firefighters. That is a piece of the story that I had not heard before and doesn't seem to be sound justification for the action. Of course, there must have been merit to the case on the other side; otherwise, the white firefighters would not have had to go through such an extensive appeals process.

I am wondering what this means for Sotomayer's confirmation.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

The test results were thrown out because (again, as UGAalum94 says) no black firefighters and only one latino fire fighters scored well enough to be promoted to begin with

Originally Posted by me

no black firefighters and only one latino fire fighter

good grief. talk about majoring in minors. that was the geist of my post.

[Munchkin03]

I'm confused as to how this made it all the way to the Supreme Court. It seems pretty cut and dried to me in that the test results should not have been thrown out. Am I missing something? I am definitely not a Sotomayor fan, but I don't think that has colored my viewpoint on this.

Was the content like the professional exams, where they're based on things you were taught in school and learned on the job? Or are they more like the HS standardized exams? I know there's an alleged class/race bias on those tests, but I know that there aren't any in the other professional exams.

I couldn't find this in any article, but was the content determined to be biased against the minority candidates? Was the testing information widely available for review and practice?

I mean, I have exams I have to take and pass in order to become registered. If I fail one, just because I'm black doesn't mean that they should throw out the test results for everyone.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by starang21

good grief. talk about majoring in minors. that was the geist of my post.

Sue me -- I'm a lawyer and I pick the nits like crazy when it comes to court opinions.

And here, it is a distinction with a legal difference -- or at least a difference that matters in understanding the opinion -- I think.

[UGAalum94]

The sequence of how it went down is what actually matters in the case, I think.

The actual suit resolved today depends entirely on the promotions being canceled.

The city claims that the reason they canceled the results was that they expected Black and Hispanic firefighters to sue if they went through with the promotion. Today, the Supreme Court said that being afraid you'd get sued alone wasn't a good enough reason to discriminate against a different racial group.

It's hard not to feel bad for the dyslexic guy who said he studied for like 10 hours a day and scored well enough for a promotion and then didn't get one based on the performance of other racial/ethnic subgroups on the test, over which, of course, he had absolutely no control.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

I'm confused as to how this made it all the way to the Supreme Court. It seems pretty cut and dried to me in that the test results should not have been thrown out. Am I missing something? I am definitely not a Sotomayor fan, but I don't think that has colored my viewpoint on this.

Was the content like the professional exams, where they're based on things you were taught in school and learned on the job? Or are they more like the HS standardized exams? I know there's an alleged class/race bias on those tests, but I know that there aren't any in the other professional exams.

I couldn't find this in any article, but was the content determined to be biased against the minority candidates? Was the testing information widely available for review and practice?

I mean, I have exams I have to take and pass in order to become registered. If I fail one, just because I'm black doesn't mean that they should throw out the test results for everyone.

Thank you!

The fact that this made it to the Supreme Court amazes me.

Whether the test was analyzed for racial biases or not, how can a FIREFIGHTING TEST be geared toward whites? It makes me extremely mad to think that New Haven might have thought, "Well, only white people passed. That's not fair. And we don't want to get sued." I'm sorry, but if any of the people who didn't pass the test had sued, that case probably never would have seen the inside of a courtroom. At least it shouldn't have, because there would have been absolutely no justification for it.

I don't know about anyone here, but when people show up to my house to rescue me from a possible fiery death, I want people who know what they're doing. I don't care if they're white, black, blue, green or purple. If you're educated and trained enough to save my life, then come get me. But if you can't pass the firefighting test, go study more.

New Haven actually decided that promotions, that were apparently necessary in the FIRE DEPARTMENT, could be put on hold because only whites passed. That's sad.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

The city claims that the reason they canceled the results was that they expected Black and Hispanic firefighters to sue if they went through with the promotion.

where'd you read this at? just want to know the source.

that's a very poor reason to throw out results.