U.S. Supreme Court
Justice Kennedy Likely Key Vote in Reverse Discrimination Case
Posted Apr 23, 2009 12:28 PM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss
All eyes were on likely swing voter Justice Anthony M. Kennedy during oral arguments yesterday in a reverse discrimination case.
The suit was filed by white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., who passed a promotional exam, only to have the results thrown out because no blacks got top scores. During oral arguments, justices searched “for the line where possible discrimination against one race turns into actual discrimination against another,” the Washington Post reports.
Kennedy is often skeptical of race-based government polices, the Post says. Liberal Justice Stephen G. Breyer apparently hoped to win Kennedy’s support for New Haven’s position with a hypothetical based on a Kennedy concurrence in a related 2007 case, Legal Times reports.
When the lawyer for the firefighters, Gregory Coleman, noted Breyer’s example came from Kennedy’s opinion, Breyer was quick to acknowledge it, Legal Times notes. "That's just what I'm doing exactly," Breyer said.
But Kennedy appeared sympathetic to the conservatives’ position that New Haven had stepped over the line, the New York Times reports. Addressing a lawyer representing the federal government, Kennedy said the city “looked at the results, and it classified the successful and unsuccessful applicants by race. .... And then you want us to say this isn’t race? I have trouble with this argument.”
The federal government, appearing as a friend of the court, is urging a middle ground, the Times says. The Justice Department says the Supreme Court should remand the case for a determination whether New Haven’s cited reason for tossing the results was a pretext for intentional discrimination against the white firefighters.
The case is Ricci v. DeStefano.

Comments
B. McLeod
Apr 23, 2009 12:44 PM CST
I have read a few dozen articles now on this case. The point I am having the most trouble with is, why don’t they remand it for evidence on whether there was actually something wrong with the test? If we look at all the existing jurisdprudence on this topic area, it seems to me to be a reasonably straightforward and commonsense conclusion to say that: 1) you can’t conclude that the test was discriminatory simply based on the dispersion of a single set of results; 2) it follows that if there is no other evidence that the test was discriminatory, the city should not have thrown it out based on mere guesswork and/or racial politics and; 3) if there is a preponderance of evidence establishing that identifiable features of the test were discriminatory, the city’s action was proper.
Flag this comment
J.D.
Apr 23, 2009 2:51 PM CST
Also, a couple of Hispanic applicants passed without problem. If the value of a test is determined by whether those passing look like the United Nations, this country is on a downward spiral. Reward competence. Train for competence. Don’t dumb down society.
Flag this comment
Chris
Apr 24, 2009 7:20 AM CST
McLeeod, I agree that the test should be reviewed, however the test should have been validated before it was administered to the firefighters. Once the employees take the test and the test is scored they have no right to throw out the results just because the outcome was not what they wanted. How much money and time was spent with the purchase of the test, administering it and scoring it? Now, they want to make it a do-over? What kind of promotional program is this anyway?
Flag this comment
J.D.
Apr 24, 2009 8:09 AM CST
A test is only acceptable if all the white males fail.
Flag this comment
Add a Comment
We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.
Commenting has expired on this post.