Hispanic nominee still safe after court ruling

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the City of New Haven, Connecticut had erred in not recognizing a validated promotional examination for the city fire department because no Blacks were in the top ranks. This ruling is contrary to what Supreme Court Judge nominee Sonia Sotomayor, and two other Second Circuit judges had decided earlier in the same case. So, does this mean Sotomayor is not ready to be a Supreme Court Justice? In the eyes of some, they would say yes, but before anyone rushes out to pass judgment on her, it is critical to look at the actual court case itself.

There is no question that the Ricci v. Stefano case was going to be a high profile because the fire fighters from the New Haven Fire Department alleging discrimination are White. (There was also one Hispanic.) They alleged that their civil rights had been violated after the City of New Haven rejected the scores of the promotional exam after no African Americans placed in the top ranks. The City claimed that the lack of African Americans on the top ranks demonstrated a disparate impact therefore the exam results should be thrown out. Given the history of the City of New Haven towards Blacks, the Second Circuit Court, along with Sotomayor, agreed with the City of New Haven.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects all applicants for employment or promotion. To ensure equal protections, employers conduct validation studies on open and promotional examinations. This process requires that an impartial expert individual or company scan the examination questions to identify any bias. The lack of African Americans on the top ranks of the New Haven Fire Department's promotional exam in 2003 prompted the City to intervene and invalidate the exam. The Second Circuit judges took a broad-brush approach and used the City's poor history of hiring African Americans to side with the city. However, the U.S. Supreme Court took more of a surgical approach, saying the tests had been validated, therefore there was no disparate treatment of African Americans.

In her first key decision as a Supreme Court Justice, Sotomayor sided with three other justices arguing that history or patterns of discrimination play a key role in discrimination cases. The majority of the justices disagreed, saying the test was not biased since it had already been validated.

What is clear from this case is the need to have perspective and understanding of the law at the Supreme Court level and not politics. Sotomayor and the three other dissenting judges brought perspective of inclusion in considering past actions of discrimination, a perspective supported by the fundamentals of the civil rights . The majority decision was focused on a key point of the law, were the tests validated? Both sides were accurate from a legal standpoint, but perspective is also essential, which is what Sotomayor brings to the Supreme Court.