Legal Commentary

Title VII, The SCOTUS, Judicial Activism and "Disparate Impact"

By Big Tent Democrat

Ian Millhiser writes:

One of the centerpieces of federal civil rights law is the ban on disparate impact discrimination. In 1964, Congress passed a law forbidding race discrimination in hiring, but it soon became very clear that racist employers rarely leave a paper trial proving that a job applicant was turned down because of their race. The ban on disparate impact discrimination was a response to this reality, intended to “smoke[] out hidden bigotry” by forcing employers to justify practices that have an adverse impact on minorities. . . . In 1989, the Supreme Court in Wards Cove Packing v. Antonio significantly weakened the ban on disparate impact discrimination. Congress responded almost immediately by overturning Wards Cove with the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Right-wing justices tried their best to roll back civil rights law, but they were rebuffed by elected representatives.

Since Wards Cove, Congress has gotten much more progressive, but the Supreme Court has lurched to the right. In other words, the time is ripe for another conflict between Congress and the Court regarding whether civil rights law can continue to smoke out clandestine bigotry in hiring. . . .

(Emphasis supplied) And the brazen, judicially activist, extreme conservative wing of the Roberts Court are just the white men to do it - to overturn the wishes of the People as expressed through the elected branches of government - the Legislative and Executive Branch. The White Man's Burden must be lifted . . .

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on June 08, 2009 (boomark / email).