6.29

Trademark Eastwoodian scowl. Ya feelin' lucky? Do ya, punk?

Don't really know what to blog about for this one. I've been tweeting about Michael Jackson for the past few days. That's getting old.

I think we're about half way (at least) through with "Gran Torino." The film is a much more entertaining film than I thought it'd be. From the previews I had seen, I thought it was going to be a standard Eastwoodian drama exercising a tour de force in themes of angst and redemption that was sure to be mentally exhausting for the viewer (RE: "Mystic River"). I look forward to finishing it now. I'm just glad we didn't watch "Crash." Most overrated film to win "Best Picture" at the Oscars since "Shakespeare In Love."

I might take a break from working on my Web site for a few days. Might tackle that take home test if I get bored. Might sneak in some time for more Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, too. Yep. Might just do that.

It's probably good I should meditate some on the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in favor of the group of 17 white and one hispanic firefighters who were denied promotions in New Haven, Conn. In 2003, they all passed the test for promotions but had the results invalidated by the city because the city was afraid it might get sued because no blacks ranked high enough to get promoted, prompting possible lawsuits claiming the exam to be racially biased against blacks (RE: disparate impact). After the 17 white and one hispanic firefighters sued the city for being passed on for promotions, the district court ruled in the city's favor in 2006. That was overturned by the Supreme Court today, June 29, 2009.

Side note: some have assumed that no blacks passed the 2003 exam, which is false. 56 firefighters passed the exam, which was created by an independent, third-party company that responded to a Request For Proposal: 41 whites, 9 blacks and 6 hispanics passed - only 17 whites and 2 hispanics could expect promotion. I think they could only promote a percentage of those who passed, so that's why the other ones who passed didn't get promoted. This cut off number is confusing, but that doesn't matter. It was likely that no blacks tested high enough to be promoted to captain or lieutenent.

Key fact: the fire deparment did not administer those tests for promotions - a third-party, independent company did. This is not unusual for fire departments. These tests cost a lot of time and money if they go with the "do-it-yourself" route. The problem is that disparate impact means that something that appears neutral and non-discriminatory on the surface but is indeed discriminatory in all aspects against a protected class, can be open to heavy lawsuits. That is the language of the law and why the New Haven district court ruled in favor of the city.

Another key fact: the 18 firefighters who sued were not entitled nor guaranteed to get the promotions. They sued because they felt they were discriminated against after the city invalidated the tests.

"Fear of litigation alone cannot justify the city's reliance of race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions," the court ruled.

The Supreme Court could have ruled in favor of either one and be justifiably correct, I think, given the unique facts of the case and that the City of New Haven truly did have reason to think they could've been exposed to civil rights violations and lawsuits therein. The key to understanding this case and why it could have gone either way is to know what possibly being open to a lawsuit for disparate impact means and how the New Haven fire department was walking a very fine line between making an honest drive for equal access and opportunity and engaging in reverse discrimination. A VERY fine line. The Supreme Court basically ruled that an employer cannot engage in intentional discrimination because that employer is afraid of being sued for disparate impact.

For the record, this decision isn't going to impact Sotomayor's nomination; Obama surely would've anticipated this ruling when he nominated her, and those who were already inclined to vote for or against her won't be swayed by this decision, which goes against what she endorsed. A 5-4 ruling is hardly a slam anyway.

Link to the 93-page PDF file of the Supreme Court slip opinion in Ricci v. DeStefano here. You know, in case you got tired of twiddling your thumbs for an hour.