High Court Says Black Firefighter Suit Can Proceed

High Court Says Black
Firefighter Suit Can Proceed



WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court ruled
Monday that a group of African Americans did not
wait too long to sue Chicago over a hiring test they
challenged as discriminatory, freeing them to
further press their case.

It is the second time in as many years that the high
court has tackled discrimination in testing within
the firefighting ranks. In a landmark case last year,
the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision said New
Haven, Conn., violated white firefighters' civil rights,
throwing out an exam in which no African-
Americans scored high enough to be promoted to
lieutenant or captain.

In Monday's opinion, Justice Antonin wrote for the
court that the applicants' lawsuit over a city of
Chicago test used to weed out potential firefighter
trainee applicants was not too late.

Anyone who scored 64 or below was deemed not
qualified. But the city set a second cutoff score of 89
points.


Officials told applicants who scored below 89 but
above 64 that although they passed the test, they
likely would not be hired because of the large
number of people who scored 89 or above. The
majority of those in the top-scoring group were
white; only 11 percent were black.

People are supposed to sue within 300 days after an
employment action they seek to challenge as
unlawful.

The city says the clock started when it announced
the use of the test scores on Jan. 26, 1996. The first
lawsuit in the case was filed on March 31, 1997,
430 days after the city announced the results.

But the plaintiffs say a new act of discrimination also
happened each time the scores were used in hiring
firefighter trainees between May 1996 and October
2001.

A U.S. District judge agreed with the black
applicants, but the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of
overturned that decision.

In Monday's high court ruling, Scalia said: "It may
be true that the City's January 1996 decision to
adopt the cutoff score (and to create a list of the
applicants above it) gave rise to a freestanding
disparate impact claim. ... But it does not follow that
no new violation occurred - and no new claims
could arise - when the City implemented that
decision down the road. If petitioners could prove
that the City 'used' the 'practice' that 'causes a
disparate impact,' they could prevail."

(Copyright © 2010, The Associated Press. All Rights
Reserved.)


Http://www.11alive.com/rss/rss_story.aspx?storyid=144401.