Ricci v. DeStefano Case - Essay Example

In 2009, a group of white firefighters brought a complaint to the U.S. Supreme Court against the New Haven city, Connecticut. They argued that the New Haven city discriminated against them with regards to promotions. This is because, in 2003, the city disregarded the test results of a test that the firefighters had done after they realized that the pass rate of white firefighters was about 50% higher than that of blacks (Fish, 2009). This case was referred to as Ricci v. DeStefano. The key issues in this case, which will be defined in this essay were; “disparate impact” in relation to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, arguments that urge courts to be "color blind" in their deliberations, and the concept of "narrowly tailored" court-ordered remedies for discrimination.

The test used by the city of New Haven did not test a firefighter’s ability to lead or supervise others in the line of duty; hence, caused a disparate impact.“Color blind” refers to making judicial decisions without regards to race. According to Fish (2009), the race of the federal judges is likely to affect the result of cases especially in issues relating to racial harassment in the workplace. Thus, the courts are urged to be color blind in order to have an efficient judicial decision-making process that does not discriminate individuals based on race.

“Narrowly tailored” refers to drafting something in order to meet the needs of a certain party. In this case, “narrowly tailored” refers to the ability of the court to draft certain concepts in the case in order to provide a solution to discrimination. For instance, the court rejected New Haven’s reasoning claiming that the fear of legal action cannot be used as an excuse by an employer’s dependence on the race to the disadvantage of other firefighters who performed well in the test and qualified to be promoted (Fish, 2009).

This court decision goes against Title VII of the Civil Rights Act since it promotes disparate impact.