In the case NAACP v. North Hudson Regional Fire & Rescue, a fire department in New Jersey adhered to a residency requirement for firefighters that proved to be unsound and resulted in a disparate impact on African-Americans. This particular requirement affected all firefighter candidates and covered only the date of hiring; therefore, once the firefighters were hired, they were free to live anywhere, including outside of the district. There was evidence in this case that suggested 37.4% of protected service positions are held by African-Americans in the area. With this evidence, an individual would be led to believe that around 121 of North Hudson firefighters were African-American, when in fact, there were only two employed (“NAACP v N …show more content…
The Title VII’s disparate-impact provision inhibits employment practices that have the unintentional effect of race discrimination (Walsh, 2016, p.114). Even though Congress enacted Title VII for the main purpose of confronting racial discrimination in the workplace, courts have continued to struggle to appropriately address the prevalence of subtle racial discrimination that burdens minority applicants/employees today (Ritenhouse, 2013). Another legal issue included in this case is North Hudson refusing to implement non-discriminatory hiring procedures that do not disproportionately exclude African-Americans from employment without evidence of business need. The employer also refused to correct the effects of previous discriminatory practices. As an end result of this case, the District Court held that the employer’s business-necessity justification was insufficient and that there were alternative means to achieve the goals stated that were less …show more content…
North Hudson did not require its firefighters to remain in North Hudson municipalities after they were hired; in fact, in 2008, there were only 34% to 36% of North Hudson firefighters who were residents; therefore, the initial claim to increase the response time for emergencies was invalid (Walsh, 2015, p.115). North Hudson also failed to validate that the requirements that led to an increase in firefighters who speak Spanish. The court stated that there are alternative non-discriminatory ways to ensure the employment of Spanish speaking firefighters, such as seeking bilingual applicants. Finally, community pride does not justify discriminatory practices for
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
In the Ricci v. DeStefano case, Ricci a white male filed a disparate impact lawsuit under the Title VII. Ricci past the test that was given to be promoted within the fire department. Ricci was one of many (white) candidates to passed the test. The testing service hired to administer the test discarded all test because many minorities did not pass. Dothard case would fall under the disparate impact provision because unless the weight testing requirements are revised to be fair to all regardless of gender, more men will continue to outperform women.
The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund wrote in 1971, the Supreme Court delivered a common ruling in The Griggs v. Duke power Co, which will have transformed the nation’s work place. The Supreme Court embraced a powerful legal tool known as The “disparate impact” outline. In Griggs, LDF represented a group of thirteen African-American employees employed by the Duke Power Company’s Dan River Steam Station. It is a power-generating facility which was in Draper, North Carolina. This company had an extensive history of segregating people by race.
The racial make up of all of the individual fire houses and dozens of firefighters were transferred between the 108 fire houses entirely due to their race. Lomack, along with his fellow firefighters and the union, filed a suit against the city of Newark alleging discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. A bench trial in District Court was held and the City argued that it was eliminating de facto segregation, that they were securing the “educational, sociological, and job performance” benefits of having a diverse work place and their actions were in compliance of the 1980 consent decree (Walsh, p. 276). Lomack and the Plaintiff’s claim was dismissed and judgement was entered in the defendants favor. The Plaintiffs filed an appeal shortly after.
Martin Luther King Jr. once said " We must learn to live together as brothers or we will perish together as fools". African Americans never had it easy since the day they were forced onto United States soil. They were worked as slaves, they were beaten until they could hardly stand. Never had any rights until 1954 but still then no one ever thought they should have been aloud rights. The Supreme Court decision on the cases of: Dred Scott v. Sanford, Plessy v. Ferguson, and brown v. Board of education effect the way people live today.
In Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (“Fisher II”), the United States Supreme Court will decide the constitutionality of the University of Texas’s (“University”) affirmative action policy, the impact of which is being widely debated. Some commentators fear that the Court is poised to end affirmative action altogether, thus causing reduction in the number of minorities who are admitted to universities across the country. Others believe that the Court should use Fisher II to invalidate all race-conscious policies and endorse a color-blind admissions process. Such concerns, and the expectations of those who would like to see affirmative action eliminated, are overstated. A careful analysis of the issues in Fisher II, including the Justices’
The key issue of the Oscar Grant case is the argument that institutional racism was the reason behind the crime. This is “The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin.” (Macpherson 1999 pg. 350). It can be portrayed through the attitudes of individuals, which results in discrimination. This can be through racist stereotyping that leads to the disadvantage of ethnic minorities.
On the other hand, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act attempts to remedy the “structural imbalance of the court system” by regulating private employers (Han, Week 3 Lecture, 1/23/17). Title VII uses statutory laws to regulate private employers from discriminating against characteristics like race and sex in the workplace by threatening the profits of these private entities (Han, Week 3 Lecture, 1/23/17). Unfortunately, these Title VII claims face their own barriers in court, making it difficult to use subtle discrimination to prove inequality. The limitations of these approaches are evidenced in cases like Washington v. Davis Sup. Ct. (1976), Griggs v Duke Power Co Sup.
Hence, the proposed research has an exploratory nature, because the process of exploration is usually understood as search for salient features or unique characteristics by way of studying the phenomenon at issue in order to provide new important insights (Saunders et al. 2007, p. 133). By utilizing the exploratory format of the proposed project, it will be possible to explore, detect, and scrutinize both how Race prong of Title VII protects an employee from the employer’s discriminatory behavior and how this protection can be
Can be separate but equal? The supreme court thought so in 1892.Just before The Supreme court decided this the 14th amendment was passed. It stated that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States”(The United States Constitution) were considered citizens. In the next coming years tension grew as African Americans soon found out that their separate stations were not equal to the white stations. Homer Plessy was the first to stand up and voice his opinion.
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, M. (2012). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness (Rev. ed.). New York, NY: The New Press. Michelle Alexander in her book, "The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness" argues that law enforcement officials routinely racially profile minorities to deny them socially, politically, and economically as was accustomed in the Jim Crow era.
Title VII of the civil rights act, enacted in 1964, provides legal protection to workers from discrimination as they carry out their roles and duties in the work place. The act shields employees from both their workmates and employers and the company at large. Title VII civil act address a number of issues including sexual orientation-related discrimination, age discrimination, gender discrimination, racial/tribal or place of origin discrimination, and religious discrimination (McKay, 2017). The preceding period before enactment of the Title VII civil act was plagued by widespread discrimination in all spheres of life.
Supreme Court Decisions Setting Precedent Discrimination may not seen as big a problem today, but people had to fight for that problem, and court cases set precedents for today. The case of Plessy versus Ferguson and Brown versus Board of Education helped change the way we view discrimination today. The case of Plessy versus Ferguson decided that segregation was legal as long as everything was equal. But on the other hand, Brown versus Board of Education included separate but equal schools made African-American children feel inferior to the white children. 1896, Supreme Court heard the Plessy versus Ferguson case.
The case shows that there is in fact racial discrimination in the American Criminal Justice system and that the system itself has honestly admitted that it is flawed. It illustrates that the system still needs to be scrutinized when it comes to convicting people of color and that America still does not treat everyone equally as its laws claim. This decision will produce several more appeals by individuals who feel that they may have been convicted based upon their skin color and may lead to several convictions
Civil Rights have been challenged over the years. The 14th Amendment was written to reaffirm the privileges and rights and rights of all citizens. It granted all the citizens the “equal protection of the law” no matter what their race. The Plessy vs. Ferguson and Brown vs. Board of Education are both court cases that used the Fourteenth Amendment to make important improvements for civil rights.
The Similarities between The scottsboro case and To Kill a Mockingbird From books to real life cases, one can see the American system of injustice towards the blacks of America and its lopsided juries. A system of which if you’re born of the wrong skin, you are judged with no crime being committed. A country where when you have a dark complexion, you are guilty until proven innocent. In To Kill a Mockingbird and Scottsboro boys, we meet different figures who all in common, are prejudice, racist, and ignorant. Even so, we still meet people who stand for what is right, especially since the evidence points towards their innocence.