By The Editors

In a controversial and closely-watched case, Ricci v. DeStefano et al, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled in favor of white New Haven firefighters who claimed the city had discriminated against them on racial grounds because it scrapped an officers’ promotion test in which 17 white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter met the requirements for promotion. In the test a number of black firefighters passed but none scored high enough to be considered for promotion.

By a narrow 5 to 4 decision, the Court majority declared that the city’s action violated the ban against racial discrimination of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Frank Ricci

When the results of the officers’ tests, given in 2003, came in, they showed that the white firefighters and the Hispanic firefighter had met the standard for promotion to fire lieutenant or captain. City officials, claiming that the performances of the groups showed the tests themselves were flawed, refused to promote the firefighters who had passed — in part because they feared a civil rights law suit from minority firefighters based on the “disparate impact” principle of civil rights law.

Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said the city was wrong.  “There is no evidence – let alone the required strong basis in evidence – that the tests were flawed,” he declared, adding at another point that “the process was open and fair.”

Civil rights groups expressed sharp disappointment with the decision. The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) said in a press statement that it “is a step backward from the goal of equal employment opportunity” and that it creates “a new legal standard that places additional hurdles in front of employers seeking to fulfill their obligations under the nation’s core antidiscrimination law.”

Besides Justice Kennedy, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, and Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia supported the white firefighters’ case.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter, Stephen G. Breyer and John Paul Stevens dissented.

LDF officials asserted that the Court majority “departed from well-established precedents that were properly applied” by lower courts that had ruled in favor of the city officials. They pointed to the strong dissent from the ruling that was written by Justice Ginsburg as evidence that the Court majority had, as the LDF statement said, overlooked “the critical need for robust compliance with federal civil rights laws, especially in fire departments, which have historically and notoriously denied employment to African Americans, other people of color and women.”

“Although we have made some progress as a nation, discrimination in firefighting jobs remains a significant problem,” said John Payton, LDF’s President and Director-Counsel. He added that “while the Court’s ruling unnecessarily invalidates New Haven’s actions, the majority opinion does not forbid employers from careful and deliberate efforts to develop employment selection procedures that fairly predict workplace success without fencing out entire groups.”

LDF filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the city of New Haven in the case.