• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Reverse Discrimination Case Goes to the US Supreme Court

S

Sacrilege

Senior member
This week, the Supreme Court will consider the reverse discrimination claim of Marcarelli and a group of white firefighters. They all passed a promotion exam, but the city threw out the test because no blacks would have been promoted, saying the exam had a "disparate impact" on minorities likely to violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Click to expand...
Another major shift has been in the balance of the Supreme Court. Conservatives gained a 5-4 majority during the Bush administration, although Justice Anthony Kennedy is seen as a potential swing vote.
Click to expand...

Extremely Unbiased, Unprejudiced and Neutral Source

Do you think the time has come to do away with affirmative action?

I think strong arguments can be made by both sides of the debate:

A. Blacks in America have made large gains, but overall remain at a disadvantaged state compared to Whites and other races.

B. Affirmative action proceedings often benefit not a poor, obviously disadvantaged yet qualified individual, but rather middle class Blacks who simply didn't do as good as some peer of another race. This results in racial tension and bitterness from the other races.

I am very interested how the court rules.
 
I think it is time to move away from AA and onto individualized enforcement of discrimination laws.

Mass wholesale racism just doesn't exist in most of the country anymore.
 
Anyone who thinks we should base any decisions off skin color is a racist fuck.

Do the right thing SCOTUS. :thumbsup:
 
I don't think it's time to get rid of it, but perhaps reform the way it works. Obama actually had some good ideas on it (imo). Basically he doesn't feel it is right his children would have an advantage over a white child who lives in poverty simply because of their skin color. He wants to make it based on socioeconomic background (well, that's a very broad would of describing it).
 
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
This week, the Supreme Court will consider the reverse discrimination claim of Marcarelli and a group of white firefighters. They all passed a promotion exam, but the city threw out the test because no blacks would have been promoted, saying the exam had a "disparate impact" on minorities likely to violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Why would the city develop some elaborate test if they weren't willing to live with the results? If you want some degree of control over whom you promote (and by extension, their race) you can't rely completely on a written exam to screen your candidates.
 
Will be interesting to see how this turns out. I don't think affirmative action is all bad, but cases like this are a good example of how unfair it can be. It sounds like some of the minority firefighters are trying to claim the tests are biased against them or something, which I don't understand at all. It sounds like anybody could have passed the test if they put in the effort to prepare. Maybe there's more to the story, though (this article is the first I've heard about it).

"All were afforded the same notice, the same study period, the same exam syllabi, etc.," said Torre, who would only answer questions by e-mail. "The rest was up to the individual."
Click to expand...
Government is supposed to guarantee equal opportunity, not equal success. Everybody had an equal opportunity to pass the test. If they didn't, it's nobody's fault except their own.
 
When I require the assistance of local safety forces, I always hope they send the proper racial mix. Having the best people to save my house or life is always secondary to racial balance. I'm sure people of any race would be comfortable with relying on second or third rate people directing the saving of everything they own or the lives of their loved ones as long as the proper quotas are adhered to.
 
It shows the leaps and progress USA has made from when AA was created. Even a non-white can win election and becomes President here.
 
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
When I require the assistance of local safety forces, I always hope they send the proper racial mix. Having the best people to save my house or life is always secondary to racial balance. I'm sure people of any race would be comfortable with relying on second or third rate people directing the saving of everything they own or the lives of their loved ones as long as the proper quotas are adhered to.
Click to expand...

That's not what AA is supposed to be for. Just because people bork it up doesn't make the entire reasoning behind it invalid.

However, I'm still against AA in favor of the overall socioeconomic background. Until we radically redesign and repair our broken education system (among others) there is just too much of the deck stacked against too many people.
 
Edit: Misread the story a bit.

Anyway, I wouldn't expect the USSC to use this as an opportunity to scrap AA.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think it is time to move away from AA and onto individualized enforcement of discrimination laws.

Mass wholesale racism just doesn't exist in most of the country anymore.
Click to expand...

How about I put you from birth in a ghetto, in poverty, with worse education, and at age 18 I say 'you weren't harmed you have full equality now'.

There was a century of racism. It doesn't work lie a light switch - 'it's over now'. During that century, the black race had their families systemically prevented from advancing one generation to the next the way other races were able to, increasing education and wealth over the decades. Just saying 'ok, no more discrimnation now' and leaving in place situations where blacks are one tenth as likely to get access to work *because of the effects of that discrimination* - you just leave that low rate for blacks alone permanently.

Others believe in actually creating a level playing field - but knowing that's impossible, they would like to level it just a little bit in the extremely clear cases of injustice.

Those efforts undo a small part of the racism for a century, and help blacks compete equally from then on. Yes, you might have to give up a little - but you have the great advantage, very likely, of the century allowing your situaton to get a lot better as your family advanced while the black families were prevented.

IMO, you are damn selfish to proudly demand you keep all the advantages from the injustice the racism did, and not be willing to give up anything to move to equality.
 
If a test has very different results among different groups, you can come to two assumptions. First, that one group is less capable than the other. Second, that the test favors one group over the other. It seems that you all have come to the first conclusion. The New Haven Fire Department's policy is to throw out test results that drastically favor one racial group, because they assume that is indicative of a discriminatory test rather than racial superiority. None of us have seen this test, so we cannot make an informed judgment in this regard.

The New Haven Fire Department did not discriminate on white firefighters. Rather, it removed the test as the sole determinate of promotion. Perhaps black firefighters performed similarly to white firefighters in every way except for written exam performance. If that were the case, it would be understandable to disregard an exam that was incongruous with other standards of firefighting and management performance. This is speculation on my part, but it is no more objectionable than the assumption put forth by the posters before me: that the test is fair and the white firefighters superior.
 
Originally posted by: n yusef
If a test has very different results among different groups, you can come to two assumptions. First, that one group is less capable than the other. Second, that the test favors one group over the other. It seems that you all have come to the first conclusion. The New Haven Fire Department's policy is to throw out test results that drastically favor one racial group, because they assume that is indicative of a discriminatory test rather than racial superiority. None of us have seen this test, so we cannot make an informed judgment in this regard.

The New Haven Fire Department did not discriminate on white firefighters. Rather, it removed the test as the sole determinate of promotion. Perhaps black firefighters performed similarly to white firefighters in every way except for written exam performance. If that were the case, it would be understandable to disregard an exam that was incongruous with other standards of firefighting and management performance. This is speculation on my part, but it is no more objectionable than the assumption put forth by the posters before me: that the test is fair and the white firefighters superior.
Click to expand...

What would be a racially unfair question on a firefighter exam? 😕
 
Originally posted by: nkgreen

What would be a racially unfair question on a firefighter exam? 😕
Click to expand...

Perhaps one which did not reflect on their abilities as firefighters, but did reflect on the unequal educations they received, where the black person got a worse education because of the ongoing effects of past racism. That could be a question on which the non-black person has an edge, but it has no real use for proving he's more qualified.
 
I guess I just don't see how a written exam could favor one group over another. It's a test -- you're told what to study and you study it. How can this be unfair if everybody is given the same opportunity to prepare?

But as I mentioned before, we don't have all the facts, maybe there's more to this. FWIW, the lower court ruled against the claimants in this case.
 
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nkgreen

What would be a racially unfair question on a firefighter exam? 😕
Click to expand...

Perhaps one which did not reflect on their abilities as firefighters, but did reflect on the unequal educations they received, where the black person got a worse education because of the ongoing effects of past racism. That could be a question on which the non-black person has an edge, but it has no real use for proving he's more qualified.
Click to expand...

:roll:

One standard for all. Race cannot be a factor.
 
Originally posted by: frostedflakes
I guess I just don't see how a written exam could favor one group over another. It's a test -- you're told what to study and you study it. How can this be unfair if everybody is given the same opportunity to prepare?

But as I mentioned before, we don't have all the facts, maybe there's more to this. FWIW, the lower court ruled against the claimants in this case.
Click to expand...

You assume that everyone starts studying from an equal position. Whites may have an advantage due to education that this test measures, but is not relevant to the business of firefighting.

Also, I just googled for bias in SAT testing, and I came across an interesting page. Text

Here is a quote:
Mr. Freedle compared the performances of black students and white students on what are considered the easy questions and hard questions on the test. Among students who had received the same overall score, he says, the black students had consistently scored a little better on the hard questions and a little worse on the easy ones. Mr. Freedle hypothesizes that the easy questions, in both the verbal and math sections of the test, use a more common vocabulary, which is open to a wider variety of interpretations and associations based on one's cultural background. However, the hard questions, he says, use a rarer vocabulary that has fewer meanings and is more likely to be encountered only in an academic setting.
Click to expand...

Certain language may be interpreted differently by people of different races, leading to disparate impact.
 
Originally posted by: frostedflakes
I guess I just don't see how a written exam could favor one group over another. It's a test -- you're told what to study and you study it. How can this be unfair if everybody is given the same opportunity to prepare?
Click to expand...

Depends. Is it the kind of test where all the info can be studied for, or does it rely more on previous education? Are the questions important for the person's qualifications?

Does the test favor people who have better educational experiences available because of past racist policies on schools, yet not really address important qualifications?

Those are things that could be in effect racist.

I'm just answering speculatvely; as you said, we lack the needed facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top