Ricci And What The Obama Administration Can Do

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 05:49:28 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

I've written below urging the Congress to act to overturn the SCOTUS' judicial lawmaking in Ricci. The National Women's Law Center notes that the Obama Administration can also act. NWLC President Marcia Greenberger said, in part:

[W]hile today’s ruling diminishes employers’ ability to comply with anti-discrimination law, it does leave the door open for employers to act responsibly. As the Court recognized, employers are still obligated to take steps to remove both intentional discrimination and unjustified practices that adversely impact individuals based on their sex, race, national origin or religion. We call on the Obama Administration to issue guidance for employers on how to ensure that they offer fair promotional and job entry exams.”

(Emphasis supplied.) Good thinking from the NWLC. The Obama Administration also has a significant role it can play to dampen the effects of Ricci.

Speaking for me only

< Irony: SCOTUS' Ricci Decision Hurts Businesses | Monday Night Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Ricci And What The Obama Administration Can Do | 18 comments (18 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Beyond wikipedia, I'm not very familiar with (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by tigercourse on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:07:39 PM EST

this case. Did anyone ever establish how the test could be interpreted as biased against non whites?

Disparate impact/Title VII (1.00 / 2) (#4)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:17:59 PM EST

I am sorry, but if you are not up to speed after the month of posting I did on the issues I can not start from the beginning.


Near as I can tell, only the numbers.... (none / 0) (#5)
by jerry on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:41:44 PM EST

There was apparently some testimony that the test had a cultural bias or asked irrelevant questions. But given how the test was designed and by whom, that seems like a weak claim.

The city itself had contracted with IOS to get a technical test verification report, but they didn't wait for that to come through and tossed out the test only on the basis of the numbers. The numbers didn't seem to come out right, and therefore the test is presumed to be flawed. INAL, but that seems to be the direct Title VII disparate impact theory.

See this thread Ricci as a Defeat for Business Interests Inflicted by "Pro-Business" Conservative Justices: that BTD linked to earlier for some interesting discussion.


: well, we all know that black people don't (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by of1000Kings on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:09:54 PM EST

study or work hard like their white counterparts...
That must be why the test results came back the way they did...

: Thank you. That's a useful link. (none / 0) (#6)
by tigercourse on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 07:29:09 PM EST

I can't find anything on that argument (none / 0) (#13)
by BrassTacks on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 01:56:21 PM EST

I can't find evidence that the test was bias, only the results.


I think I've figured out, finally, that (5.00 / 0) (#8)
by Anne on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:16:48 PM EST

there was more to the famous slogan than just "Yes, We Can;" the rest of it is apparently "But We Might Not Feel Like It."

What the administration can do with respect to the Ricci decision is one thing; what they will do is something else altogether.

: Combined with the famous FDR 'Now, make me' (5.00 / 0) (#11)
by ruffian on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 10:51:23 AM EST

quote, I call it
'Yes we can, but you can't make me'

President's press sec'y on Ricci: (none / 0) (#2)
by oculus on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:12:28 PM EST

[link:/whitehouse.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/06/29/dont-worry-be-happy]

Sorry the link is to fox news whitehouse blog.

: Oops bad linkage. (none / 0) (#3)
by oculus on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:13:25 PM EST

"what they will do?" (none / 0) (#9)
by NYShooter on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 08:14:19 AM EST

Glutton for punishment.

Obama flips all his cards over if he even thinks there'll be an objection; when a Republican starts clearing his throat, Bama collapses like a runaway slinky falling down the basement stairs.

It's really getting to be an embarrassment. How many time does Krugman have to admonish him, "Mr. President, next time would you please WAIT until one of them raises a finger before collapsing like a sack of potatoes.

Either (none / 0) (#10)
by Wile ECoyote on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 10:39:04 AM EST

outlaw studying for promotion exams, or force everyone to study for promotion exams, taking an individuals choice out of it, or go with a union style seniority-based promotion.

Apparently (none / 0) (#12)
by jbindc on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 01:03:59 PM EST

The tests really required applicants to take a class and buy the study materials (at something like $500 +). An applicant didn't HAVE to take the class, but it was very difficult to pass without taking the class. Many of the white (and Hispanic, I believe)applicants lived in the suburbs, which tend to have higher disposable incomes, so they were more likely to be able to afford the class. Also, many of the white firefighters were legacies - with 2nd and 3rd generations working for the department, so many of them had access to study materials for free and "mentors" that would be able to coach them on what was tested (apparently not much practical knowledge was tested, but more theoretical).

That may not answer all of the questions, but it's a start.


: Ricci had (none / 0) (#15)
by Wile ECoyote on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 02:01:08 PM EST

dyslexia and spent about 1000 bucks getting the study materials converted to tape. Shame on him.

: So you would (none / 0) (#17)
by Wile ECoyote on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 02:04:24 PM EST

outlaw studying for the tests?

Huh? (none / 0) (#14)
by BrassTacks on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 02:00:23 PM EST

No one can choose to study and work harder? Should we do that for college courses too? Medical school and law school exams too?

Shouldn't study and hard work matter? Shouldn't those who know the job better, whether through study or hard work, be rewarded?

My kids would love the idea of never having to study for a test again.

We could always just eliminate all tests for everything. Make every job and every promotion random. Everyone who applies for a job has an equal chance of getting it, regardless of how hard they've worked in school, or on the job. Totally random, like the lottery. That seems fair.


: That would make it fair for everyone. (none / 0) (#16)
by Wile ECoyote on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 02:02:46 PM EST

Social promotion. They should promote everyone no matter what. That would prevent bad feelings all around.

People unlcear on the concept (none / 0) (#18)
by jbindc on Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 03:13:49 PM EST

Um, yes, you CAN study harder - if you have access to study materials, like if you are a legacy and get the materials from family or friends, and can afford to pay for a study class.

Kinda hard to study for something if you can't take the class or get a hold of the materials.