SCOTUS proceedings
Today is the end of the latest term of the Supreme Court and there are 3 major decisions to be decided:
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
- Cuomo v. The Clearing House Association LLC
- Ricci, et al. v. DeStefano, et al.
(Links to case write-up are courtesy of SCOTUSblog, who was running a live blog of today’s end-of-term session.)
As I was beginning to write this post, I was notified via Twitter than the Court has issued a ruling in the Ricci case and has overturned the 2nd Court of Appeals, a ruling that was decided partly by current SCOTUS nominee Sotamayor. The case deals with the matter of a group of New Have, CT firefighters who were taking a test for advancement. The City threw out the test completely because the white firefighters all scored higher than the black ones. Rather than let the results of the test stand, the City simply tossed the results with the result that none of the white firefighters advanced, either. The City’s contention was that they were afraid they’d get sued for using the test results. The white firefighters used exactly the law the City cited to sue them for not using them. The Court agreed with the firefighters that this was illegal. The decision can be found here in PDF format.
I recommend heading over to SCOTUSblog if you’re interested in this kind of stuff. They’ve got good people who are all over this!
Update: As I was writing this the decision in Cuomo was announced. Again by 5-4 the Court rules in favor of the States’ right to police discrimination in mortgage lending. The opinion is here.
Comments
Comment from Ric James
Time June 29, 2009 at 14:23
I’m a network engineer who blogs in my spare time, not a law clerk. I never claimed to be writing exhaustive descriptions of legal cases. The facts that I named when I gave the brief description of the case are accurate and are not rendered any less so by not including a time line though I’m glad to see you provided one. I provided links (and an endorsement of SCOTUSblog who, it seems, *does* have folks with legal training writing for them) to further information on the case and the actual decision rendered by Court. I’m comfortable with that. Did you have a chance to look at either one? I’ve read the pertinent post at SCOTUSblog but the actual decision is just way too long for me to do at the moment.
I can understand what you mean when you say you don’t “blame” the city, which I interpret to mean you don’t think they had any truly malicious intent against Ricci, et al. I tend to agree. However, they are the ones who decided upon the actions taken and in that context they are the only ones to blame. They made their decision and it was wrong. Now they, and we, know for next time. That’s a good thing.
Comment from Bob James
Time June 29, 2009 at 14:06
You’re being incomplete. The city decided that the fact that no black and only 2 Latinos scored high enough to warrant promotion on the test implied that the test was somehow biased, and decided to pitch the results. You are correct that the city feared a lawsuit if they went ahead and used the results as they stood to promote only whites. They decided to promote no one, and re-engineer a new test, paying special attention to making sure the test was as race-neutral as it could. *That’s* when the white firefighters sued, since they passed the test according to the rules given at the time.
I completely support their suit, and think it’s wonderful that a decision was handed down to clarify the situation. The white firefighters played by the rules they were given, and succeeded. They should be rewarded. *Then* the city can redesign the test, if they feel so moved.
I don’t really hold the city to blame, though. They were also trying to comply with the rules they had to work with at the time,including the Hobson’s choice they were offered. Now, that choice has been removed.