- Joined
- May 6, 2010
- Messages
- 15,701
Supreme Court Won?t Revisit New Haven Firefighter Case
Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2012
WASHINGTON ? The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal that argued New Haven, Conn., couldn?t be sued for discriminating against black firefighters because the high court already had admonished it for discriminating against white firefighters.
At issue was a long-running dispute over a 2003 written and oral examination administered by the city to determine which firefighters would be promoted to higher-ranking positions.
In a 2009 Supreme Court case, Ricci v. DeStefano, the justices ruled 5-4 that New Haven unfairly discriminated against a group of mostly white firefighters by scrapping the test results, which made them eligible for promotions. Black candidates didn?t score as well on the test.
The city said it didn?t certify the test results out of worry that black firefighters would file a federal civil-rights lawsuit alleging discrimination. The Supreme Court, however, ruled New Haven didn?t have a ?strong basis in evidence? to believe that it would be held liable for discriminating against black workers if it used the test scores.
As a result of the ruling, the city certified the exam results.
Now New Haven finds itself in a Catch-22 of sorts: Michael Briscoe, a black firefighter, has come forward with the type of lawsuit the city originally feared.
Briscoe alleged the city?s test did in fact have a discriminatory impact on blacks. He said the weighting of the oral and written components of the city?s test, 60% and 40%, respectively, was arbitrary because it departed from the industry standard, which gives 70% weight to the oral portion and 30% to the written part.
Briscoe said he would have been eligible for promotion under the normal standard.
New Haven contended that a New York-based appeals court, which ruled last year that Briscoe?s lawsuit could go forward, flagrantly contravened the Supreme Court?s guidance in the Ricci case. The city cited a sentence in the high court?s earlier opinion that suggested New Haven couldn?t be held liable for discriminating against black candidates after the justices required the city to use the test results to avoid discriminating against whites.
The lower court ruling ?exposes the city to?liability for implementing the very remedies that the [Supreme] Court mandated,? the city said in a court brief.
Mr. Briscoe said in his brief that he ?is entitled to his day in court? and nothing in the earlier Supreme Court ruling overturned that settled principle.
In last year?s lower-court ruling, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it couldn?t reconcile all the different indications from the Supreme Court?s opinion in the Ricci case.
The Supreme Court, in a short written order, left the lower-court ruling in place and rejected New Haven?s appeal without comment.
Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2012
WASHINGTON ? The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal that argued New Haven, Conn., couldn?t be sued for discriminating against black firefighters because the high court already had admonished it for discriminating against white firefighters.
At issue was a long-running dispute over a 2003 written and oral examination administered by the city to determine which firefighters would be promoted to higher-ranking positions.
In a 2009 Supreme Court case, Ricci v. DeStefano, the justices ruled 5-4 that New Haven unfairly discriminated against a group of mostly white firefighters by scrapping the test results, which made them eligible for promotions. Black candidates didn?t score as well on the test.
The city said it didn?t certify the test results out of worry that black firefighters would file a federal civil-rights lawsuit alleging discrimination. The Supreme Court, however, ruled New Haven didn?t have a ?strong basis in evidence? to believe that it would be held liable for discriminating against black workers if it used the test scores.
As a result of the ruling, the city certified the exam results.
Now New Haven finds itself in a Catch-22 of sorts: Michael Briscoe, a black firefighter, has come forward with the type of lawsuit the city originally feared.
Briscoe alleged the city?s test did in fact have a discriminatory impact on blacks. He said the weighting of the oral and written components of the city?s test, 60% and 40%, respectively, was arbitrary because it departed from the industry standard, which gives 70% weight to the oral portion and 30% to the written part.
Briscoe said he would have been eligible for promotion under the normal standard.
New Haven contended that a New York-based appeals court, which ruled last year that Briscoe?s lawsuit could go forward, flagrantly contravened the Supreme Court?s guidance in the Ricci case. The city cited a sentence in the high court?s earlier opinion that suggested New Haven couldn?t be held liable for discriminating against black candidates after the justices required the city to use the test results to avoid discriminating against whites.
The lower court ruling ?exposes the city to?liability for implementing the very remedies that the [Supreme] Court mandated,? the city said in a court brief.
Mr. Briscoe said in his brief that he ?is entitled to his day in court? and nothing in the earlier Supreme Court ruling overturned that settled principle.
In last year?s lower-court ruling, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it couldn?t reconcile all the different indications from the Supreme Court?s opinion in the Ricci case.
The Supreme Court, in a short written order, left the lower-court ruling in place and rejected New Haven?s appeal without comment.