Heraldnet.com
MONDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2009 5:32 pm
LocalNorthwestNation & WorldPoliticsSpecial ReportsPhotosColumnistsMultimedia 
Herald Editorial Board

Bob Bolerjack,
Opinion Editor
bolerjack@heraldnet.com

Carol MacPherson,
Editorial Writer
cmacpherson@
heraldnet.com


Allen Funk,
Herald Publisher
funk@heraldnet.com

Kim Heltne,
Assistant to the Publisher
heltne@heraldnet.com

Send letters to the editor by e-mail to letters@heraldnet.com, by fax to 425-339-3458 or mail to The Herald - Letters, P.O. Box 930, Everett, WA 98206.

 
WEEK IN REVIEW
Sunday


See the holiday light spectacle at Warm Beach
Only weather stands between 787 and its first f...
Washington could see new taxes in a host of areas
Saturday


University of Washington Bothell may take Casca...
Swine flu vaccine requests pour in at Snohomish...
Energy records broken as Snohomish County shivers
Friday


Mill Creek family opens hearts to teen
787 set to fly Tuesday
Snow next? Maybe a little
Thursday


Girl's death in car crash stuns Granite Falls
Swine flu shots to be available to all in county
Gregoire's budget offers no easy way out of def...
Wednesday


Grief and gratitude expressed for four slain of...
Sultan brothers plead guilty in death of rival ...
Teen dies after Granite Falls crash
Tuesday


Arlington brothers’ fight led to death, p...
Burn ban issued in Snohomish County
Woman found dead at Bothell house fire
Monday


Pearl Harbor's voices of the past
Taxes needed to close state's growing deficit?
Grant could help county's residents all be heal...
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Opinion Columnists   Print This Article  Email This Page  Subscribe Now! facebook digg reddit del.icio.us fark stumble

 
ADVERTISEMENT

 
HAVE YOUR SAY
Feel strongly about something? Share it with the community by writing a letter to the editor.
You’ll need to include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) We reserve the right to edit letters, but if you keep yours to 250 words or less, we won’t ask you to shorten it. If your letter is published, please wait 30 days before submitting another.
Send it to:
E-mail: letters@heraldnet.com
Mail: Letters section
The Herald
P.O. Box 930
Everett, WA 98206
Fax: 425-339-3458
Have a question about letters? Contact Carol MacPherson (cmacpherson@heraldnet.com or 425-339-3472).
 
Published: Tuesday, June 30, 2009

On race, the slog goes on

WASHINGTON -- Although New Haven's firefighters deservedly won in the Supreme Court, it is deeply depressing that they won narrowly -- 5-4. The egregious behavior by that city's government, in a context of racial rabble-rousing, did not seem legally suspect to even one of the court's four liberals, whose harmony seemed to reflect result-oriented rather than law-driven reasoning.

The undisputed facts are that in 2003 the city gave promotion exams to 118 firemen, 27 of them black. The tests were prepared by a firm specializing in employment exams and were validated, as federal law requires, by independent experts. When none of the African-Americans did well enough to qualify for the available promotions, a black minister allied with the seven-term mayor warned of a dire "political ramification" if the city promoted from the list of persons (including one Hispanic) that the exams identified as qualified. The city decided that no one would be promoted, calling this a race-neutral outcome because no group was disadvantaged more than any other.

The city's idea of equal treatment -- denying promotions equally to those deemed and those not deemed qualified -- was particularly galling to Frank Ricci, who had prepared for the exams by quitting his second job, buying the more than $1,000 worth of books the city recommended, paying to have them read onto audiotapes -- he is dyslexic -- and taking practice tests and interviews. His efforts earned him the sixth-highest score.

He and others denied promotions for which their exam scores made them eligible sued, charging violations of the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the laws and of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The city argued that if it had made promotions based on the test results, it would have been vulnerable under the 1964 act to being sued for adopting a practice that had a "disparate impact" on minorities. On Monday, the court's conservatives (Anthony Kennedy writing for the majority, joined by John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito) held:

The rights of Ricci et al. under the 1964 act were violated. The city's fear of a disparate impact litigation was not unfounded, but that did not justify the race-based response to the exam results because New Haven did not have "a strong basis in evidence" to believe it would be held liable. There is such evidence only if the exams "were not job related and consistent with business necessity, or if there existed an equally valid, less discriminatory alternative" that would have served the city's needs but that it refused to adopt.

"All the evidence demonstrates that the city rejected the test results because the higher scoring candidates were white." The city's criticisms of the exam "are blatantly contradicted by the record." And "the city turned a blind eye to evidence supporting the exams' validity" (emphases added).

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined in dissent by John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Stephen Breyer, rejected the majority's conclusions root and branch. She cited a federal report from the early 1970s about discrimination in hiring firefighters, disputed even the "business necessity" of the exams' 60/40 written/oral ratio and defended the integrity of New Haven's decision-making -- rejecting Alito's concurrence, which dwelt on the rancid racial politics of the Rev. Boise Kimber. Alito concluded that "no reasonable jury" could find that the city possessed a "substantial basis in evidence to find the tests inadequate."

Scalia, concurring separately, said Monday's ruling "merely postpones the evil day" on which the court must decide "whether, or to what extent," existing disparate-impact law conflicts with the 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection of the law. Conceding that "the question is not an easy one," Scalia said: The federal government is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, so surely "it is also prohibited from enacting laws mandating that third parties" -- e.g., a city government -- "discriminate on the basis of race." Scalia added:

"Would a private employer not be guilty of unlawful discrimination if he refrained from establishing a racial hiring quota but intentionally designed his hiring practices to achieve the same end? Surely he would. Intentional discrimination is still occurring, just one step up the chain."

The nation shall slog on, litigating through a fog of euphemisms and blurry categories (e.g., "race-conscious" actions that somehow are not racial discrimination because they "remedy" discrimination that no one has intended). This is the predictable price of failing to simply insist that government cannot take cognizance of race.



George Will is a Washington Post columnist. His e-mail address is georgewill@washpost.com.

READER COMMENTS
Be the first to comment.
You must be a registered user and verify your e-mail address to post comments to blogs or articles on HeraldNet.

To register, click here. To read other terms and conditions, click hereLog out

1. Boeing 787 Dreamliner lifts its nose at Paine Field; flight set for Tuesday
2. Arlington assault leaves man critically injured
3. Recession hard on Snohomish County eateries
4. Up to 3 inches of snow expected in some parts of Western Washington
5. Washington could see new taxes in a host of areas
6. I'll see you in Hell's Kitchen
7. Biz week
8. Veteran, teacher, painter — and now, Mukilteo man is an author
9. Gov. Gregoire knows her budget is doomed
10. See the holiday light spectacle at Warm Beach
Enterprise Newspaper Snohomish County Business Journal
Zambian woman thanks students for their help
Food banks see rise in use
‘Making Spirits Bright’ in Edmonds
Wolfpack takes aim at state
Seahawks help students smile
95 and still volunteering
Sno-King joined by local TV king
Veterans back for Wildcats
Lynnwood seeks to plug $2 million budget gap
The Enterprise Online Newspaper


15% Off
All Repairs!

Holiday Getaway
$99 dbl Occupancy

Special Rebate Offers!
Plus Additional 30% OFF!

Buy 1 Get 1 FREE
Lube Oil Filter

Buy 1 Dinner Entree
Get 2nd 50% Off

20% Off Dinner
Up to $75 Value!

$2 OFF
at Box Office

Nutcracker
Family Packs Available

20% Off Re-Upholstery
or Custom Furniture!

25% off Bath & Groom
New Customers

Free Gift w/ Purchase of
$100 in Gift Cards

75% OFF
Many Items. Hurry!

FREE 6 lb. Pad w/
40yd Carpet Purchase

Holiday Specials
up to 25% off!

Over 1 Million Lights
Lights of Christmas

$2.99 Chili Dog
$3.99 Fish Burger

$5 Off
Stylecut

$95 Dryer Vent Cleaning!
$99 Whole House Duct Cleaning!

Always Free
Transmission Diagnostic

20% Off Re-Upholstery
or Custom Furniture!
Flick's Upholstery
TODAY'S TOP JOBS
 View All Top Jobs 
Top Cars
Top Homes

ADVERTISEMENT