1. Home
  2. News
  3. Forum
  4. Photos
  5. Store
  6. Recipes
  7. Cultivation
  8. Smoke Shop
  9. Drug Test
  10. Advertise

Hot Products:

  • Legal Buds · 
  • Herb Grinders · 
  • Vaporizers · 
  • Rolling Papers · 
  • Drug Test · 
  • Synthetic Urine · 
  • Marijuana Dating · 
  • Pot.Com · 
  • More Products



Go Back   Marijuana.com > Knowledge > Current Events
Reload this Page Supreme Court rules White firefighters discriminated against
Register FAQ Gaming VB Image Host Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Hot Products!

Orange Krush - Legal Bud

The latest and greatest legal bud available! Orange Krush is a sweet smelling exotic herbal smoking bud that burns smooth and tastes great. Try this new legal bud now! More

Black Magic Solid Smokes

NOT LABELED AS HERBAL HASH by FDA LAW. An all natural and legal herbal solid. one-of-a-kind! More

Vapir One Vaporizer

Vapir One is a top selling herbal vaporizer manufactured by Air2, an established vaporizer producer known for quality and reliability.More

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes

Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next

Old 06-30-2009, 09:58 AM   #1
troublemaker_42
0tolerance4BS
 
troublemaker_42's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,984
Grams: 50,519.10
troublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep banktroublemaker_42 Robbed the rep bank
Thanks: 2,952
Thanked 4,182 Times in 2,025 Posts

Stock Portfolio
Total Value: 0.000
Gain/Loss: 0.000%
Default Supreme Court rules White firefighters discriminated against

High court backs firefighters in reverse discrimination suit - CNN.com

Quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court sided Monday with white firefighters in a workplace discrimination lawsuit, a divisive case over the role race should play in job advancement.


The Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling backs firefighters in a reverse discirmination case.

1 of 2 In the split 5-4 vote, a majority of the justices ruled that the city of New Haven, Connecticut, improperly threw out the results of promotional exams that officials said left too few minorities qualified.

One Latino and no African-American firefighters qualified for promotion based on the exam; the city subsequently decided not to certify the results and issued no promotions.

A group of 20 mostly white firefighters sued, claiming reverse discrimination. High court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor heard the case on her federal appeals court last year and sided with the city.

The Supreme Court was being asked to decide whether there was a continued need for special treatment for minorities, or whether enough progress has been made to make existing laws obsolete, especially in a political atmosphere in which an African-American occupies the White House.

At issue was whether the city intentionally discriminated -- in violation of both federal law and the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause.
"The city rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white," wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy for the majority. "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."

In a dissent read from the bench, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg questioned the fairness of the test, which was 60 percent written and 40 percent oral.

"Relying so heavily on pencil-and-paper exams to select firefighters is a dubious practice," Ginsburg said, calling the majority ruling "troubling."

"Congress endeavored to promote equal opportunity in fact, and not simply in form. The damage today's decision does to that objective is untold," she said.

Key plaintiff Frank Ricci and others took promotional exams in 2003 for lieutenant and captain positions that had become available in New Haven.

When the results came back, city attorneys expressed concern about the results, and the New Haven corporation counsel -- after several public hearings -- refused to certify the test, and no promotions were given.

The city said that under a federal civil rights law known as Title VII, employers must ban actions such as promotion tests that would have a "disparate impact" on a protected class, such as a specified race or gender.

The Obama administration took a nuanced position on the appeal. A Justice Department lawyer told the high court that while the federal government supported the city's discretion to nullify the test results, it also believed the lawsuit should be allowed to proceed on a limited basis.

Kennedy argued that "the process was open [and] fair" and that the city officials "were careful to ensure broad racial participation in the design of the test itself and its administration."

He added that "race-based action like the city's in this case is impermissible under Title VII unless the employer can demonstrate a strong basis in evidence that, had it not taken the action, it would have been liable" under the law dealing with "disparate impact."

Kennedy said the city had not met that threshold.

The case has received added attention because Sotomayor was on the appellate court that dismissed the appeal.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel that ruled in February 2008 to uphold a lower court decision supporting New Haven's move to throw out the results.

In June 2008, Sotomayor was part of a 7-6 majority that denied a rehearing of the case by the full court.

Legal analysts said they expect Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee will want to ask about her role in that case as well as her comments about ethnicity and the bench.
Thoughts? I support the court's decision. Whether its fighting to save my home, or someone performing open-heart surgery on a loved one.... I want the people working on my behalf, or the public's behalf, to be the most qualified people possible, not arbitrarily sleected (or NOT sleected) because of race or other considerations. The jobs should go to the best person who is qualified to perform the duties, and factors such as race and diversity shouldn't keep the most qualified people from the job or from advancing in their job. AS a white male, I've never been a fan of affirmative action, and this case demonstrates precisely why.... While "affirmative action" was invented to combat discrimination, oftentimes, it simply changed who was being discriminated against. I don't have the answers to racism, but I can assure you it won't be eneded by giving minorities jobs other people are better qualified for. No matter what my skin color may be, I'd want to know I was chosen because someone believed I'd be the best person for the job, not because someone thought the workforce of my company needed more color. Is it too much I ask to be judged on my individual merits (or lack thereof) and not my skin color? I applaud the Court's decision, and believe they more correctly came to a decsion than Sotomayor's court previously ruled on the issue. I see it as common sense, but I'm sure I'll be attacked by others who believe I'm a closet racist who simply wants to oppress the minority. of course, if everyone is on eqaul footing, the proposal wouldn't oppress anyone, it just doesn't give unfair advantages based on skin color.
__________________
Ted Nugent: "To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."


If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?
troublemaker_42 is offline Award troublemaker_42 Grams  
Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to troublemaker_42 For This Useful Post:
Andrew87 (07-03-2009), nornerator (07-04-2009)
Remove Advertisements
Marijuana.com Sponsor
troublemaker_42
View Public Profile
Send a private message to troublemaker_42
Find More Posts by troublemaker_42

 

« Oh Canada | Man who abandoned 9 kids, now dad to be »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Linear Mode
Hybrid Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode
Threaded Mode Threaded Mode

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Supreme Court rules in favour of cannabis grower 420 Marijuana Mashup 0 03-06-2008 12:01 PM
Hawaii Supreme Court Rules Against Religious Marijuana Use 420 Marijuana Mashup 0 10-03-2007 06:20 AM
HI: Hawaii Supreme Court Rules Against Religious Marijuana Use Hashishi The Drug War Headline News 6 10-02-2007 09:00 PM
Hawaii Supreme Court Rules Against Religious Marijuana Use 420 Marijuana Mashup 0 10-02-2007 10:51 AM
Hawaii Supreme Court Rules Against Religious Marijuana Use 420 Marijuana Mashup 0 10-01-2007 12:00 PM

New To Site? Need Help?
  • Advertising
  • Register to Participate
  • View Forum Leaders
  • Contact Us
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Did you forget your password?
  • Mark Forums Read

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:13 AM.


Contact Us - Marijuana.com - Archive - Top

RSS Feeds · Advertise on Marijuana.com · Home · Vaporizers · Smoke Shop · Drug Testing · Marijuana Drug Tests · Legal Weed · Marijuana Personals · RSS Feeds

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Template-Modifikationen durch TMS
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios Marijuana.com © 1995-2009
Ad Management by RedTyger


Your Ad Here
LinkBack
LinkBack URL LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks About LinkBacks
Bookmark & Share
Add Thread to del.icio.us Add Thread to del.icio.us
Bookmark in Technorati Bookmark in Technorati
Furl this Thread! Furl this Thread!

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55