Supreme Court Rules for White Firefighters

[Ben]

I thought this was of interest given the Sotomeyer connection.

I was struck by the Ginsburg quote regarding the white firefighters: "But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

This is the type of quote I always like to turn around, replacing "white" with "insert offended group here". Wasn't this all brought about because the city believed the hispanic and black firefighters had a "vested right" to promotion, and hence called off the exam because it didn't look like specific people, based on race, would get a promotion?

--------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090629/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_firefighters_lawsuit_5

Court rules for white firefighters over promotions
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer 31 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has ruled that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

New Haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results, the court said Monday in a 5-4 decision. The city said that it had acted to avoid a lawsuit from minorities.

The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide, potentially limiting the circumstances in which employers can be held liable for decisions when there is no evidence of intentional discrimination against minorities.

"Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his opinion for the court. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens signed onto Ginsburg's dissent, which she read aloud in court Monday.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ruled that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge.

New Haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results, the court said Monday in a 5-4 decision. The city said that it had acted to avoid a lawsuit from minorities.

The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide, potentially limiting the circumstances in which employers can be held liable for decisions when there is no evidence of intentional discrimination against minorities.

[Hawkmoon]

http://my.att.net/s/editorial.dll?pnum=1&bfromind=7406&eeid=6661479&_sitecat=1522&dcatid=0&eetype=article&render=y&ac=0&ck=&ch=ne&rg=blsadstrgt&_lid=332&_lnm=tg+ne+topnews&ck=

Cliff's notes summary - The SCOTUS ruled that the City of New Haven, Connecticut, acted wrongly in denying promotions to white firefighters because no minority members of the department scored well enough on a promotion exam. The city instead scrapped the exam and put the promotions on indefinite hold.

Sotomayor ruled against the white firefighters and for the city. This overturns her "wise Latina" ruling.

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

Naturally, Ginsberg missed the boat. It should be pretty well settled that when a government entity advertises positions and individuals take and pass the government's own test to qualify for said positions, they certainly have a "vested right" to their promotions. And, the ONLY reason nobody was promoted into those positions is that the white firefighters sued when their exams were tossed, effectively blocking any appointments until the case could be resolved through the courts.

Which it now has. Correctly. For once.

Firemen - 1
Reverse discrimination - 0

[Ben]

Hawkmoon beat me to the punch posting this in Roundtable, so I've merged the topics.

Oops -- no looks like  I beat Hawkmoon to the punch by a few minutes. Merged anyways. :)

[makattak]

Now, OF COURSE the Republicans are going to highlight Judge Sotomayor's not only contrary judgement in this case, but the fact they she thought this case didn't even deserve to be heard.

...Right?...


<crickets>


...Right?...

[Sergeant Bob]

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

All the usual suspects. As far as I'm concerned, they are all federal felons who have, through their positions in government, conspired to violate and deny the civil rights of American citizens, and should be locked up like any other common criminal.

[Antibubba]

In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

Is a vested right anything like a collective right?

[De Selby]

Is a vested right anything like a collective right?

No.  A vested right is one that is attached to something specific, as in a right to some particular piece of property.