New Haven FIREFIGHTERS

[hudson144 150]

New Haven 20- Story goes on: OPENING ARGUMENT

New Haven's Injustice Shouldn't Disappear

The Supreme Court should agree to hear the case of a firefighter who was denied a promotion because he is not black.

by Stuart Taylor

Saturday, Dec. 13, 2008

Frank Ricci, a firefighter in New Haven, Conn., worked hard, played by the rules, and earned a promotion to fire lieutenant. But the city denied him the promotion because he is not black. Ricci sued, along with 16 other whites and one Hispanic firefighter. After a 7-6, near-party-line vote by a federal Appeals Court to dismiss the lawsuit, the plaintiffs petitioned for Supreme Court review.

If the Court grants the petition, the now-obscure case will vault to the top of the nation's racial policy agenda, presenting a tough issue not only for the justices but also for President-elect Obama. He could come under great pressure to take a position for or against the blessing conferred by eight liberal lower-court judges on what many voters -- and, I would guess, five justices -- would see as a raw racial quota.

To be sure, it is far from clear that the Court will take the case, one of dozens scheduled to come before its confidential conference on December 12. Although a dissent by six conservative and moderate Appeals Court judges urged Supreme Court review, the case does not involve the kind of clear split among lower courts that only the high court can resolve. So it may disappear without a trace, with no occasion for Obama or his Justice Department to take a position.

A denial of review would also leave the racial-preference machinery around the country grinding steadily on without interruption. And that would be a shame, in my view, because the stark facts of this case illustrate how racial politics sometimes combine with little-known judicial precedents and "civil-rights" laws to violate the civil rights of working-class and middle-class white, Asian, and (at least in this case) Hispanic Americans.

Ricci studied for eight to 13 hours a day to prepare for the combined written and oral exam in 2003 that he hoped would win him a promotion. He spent more than $1,000 buying the books that the city had suggested as homework and paying an acquaintance to read them onto audiotapes. (Ricci is dyslexic and learns better by listening.) And he got one of the highest scores.

But Ricci and other would-be lieutenants and captains with high scores did not get the promotions they expected. The reason was that -- because not enough black firefighters had done well enough to be eligible -- New Haven decided to discard the test results and make no promotions at all.

A denial of review by the Supreme Court would leave the racial-preference machinery around the country grinding steadily on without interruption.

In their lawsuit, Ricci and his fellow plaintiffs claimed that the city, Mayor John DeStefano, and other defendants had violated their rights under the Constitution's equal protection clause and under federal civil-rights laws.

U.S. District Judge Janet Arterton of New Haven dismissed the case. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit affirmed the dismissal, in a process so peculiar as to fan suspicions that some or all of the judges were embarrassed by the ugliness of the actions that they were blessing and were trying to sweep the case quietly under the rug, perhaps to avoid Supreme Court review or public criticism, or both.

Arterton was appointed by President Clinton. So were the three 2nd Circuit judges who heard the initial appeal, including Sonia Sotomayor, who is touted by liberal and Hispanic groups as a leading candidate for an Obama appointment to the Supreme Court. The three-judge panel initially deep-sixed the firefighters' appeal in a cursory, unpublished order that disclosed virtually nothing about the nature of the ideologically explosive case.

Then the Circuit's more conservative judges got wind of the case. They sought to have it reheard by the full Appeals Court but lost in a 7-6 vote. All but one of the seven is a Clinton appointee. And all six of the dissenters were named by President George W. Bush or his father, with the exception of Jose Cabranes, a moderate Clinton appointee.

Writing for the six dissenters, Cabranes said that the majority "failed to grapple with the questions of exceptional importance raised in this appeal," and he urged the Supreme Court to do so. He also raised the question of whether the case involved "an unconstitutional racial quota or set-aside."

"At its core," Cabranes wrote, "this case presents a straightforward question: May a municipal employer disregard the results of a qualifying examination, which was carefully constructed to ensure race-neutrality, on the ground that the results of that examination yielded too many qualified applicants of one race and not enough of another?"

Cabranes stressed that despite the importance of the issues and the unusually long and detailed briefs, arguments, and factual record, the three-judge panel's "perfunctory disposition" oddly contained "no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case."

Five of the majority judges, including Sotomayor, retorted that New Haven's decision to discard the test results and deny what would otherwise have been virtually automatic promotions to the highest-scoring white and Hispanic firefighters was "facially race-neutral." The reason? Because none of the low-scoring, ineligible African-American firefighters was promoted either. These five judges also endorsed Judge Arterton's conclusion that the city's decision was justified by fears that promoting the high-scoring whites might violate Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and bring a discrimination suit by the low-scoring blacks.

I suspect that deep down, Obama would appreciate the simple injustice of the New Haven firefighter case.

Simply because a much higher percentage of the whites than of the blacks who took the exams had passed, the majority said (adopting Judge Arterton's opinion), the city could be "faced with a prima facie case of disparate impact liability under Title VII."

In seeking Supreme Court review, Karen Lee Torre, the plaintiffs' lawyer, dismissed these supposed fears as a pretext for racial politics and patronage. She stressed that there was no serious evidence that the professionally developed exams were in any way unfair, infected with bias, or unrelated to ability to perform the job.

But even so, failing to award a roughly proportionate percentage of promotions to African-Americans could subject New Haven, or any other employer, to Title VII liability -- depending on the identity of the judge -- unless it could prove that it could not possibly have found another exam on which blacks might have done better.

Indeed, large racial disparities in performance on written tests used by employers and others have long existed throughout the country. That's what one might expect, given data showing that the average black high school graduate has learned no more than the average white or Asian eighth-grader. But the law treats these disparities as evidence of racial discrimination. Many employers, therefore, seek to avoid liability by giving racial preferences to minorities, and they will continue to do so unless and until the Supreme Court modifies, or clarifies, the law.

Racial politics clearly did figure in the city's denial of promotions to the white and Hispanic firefighters. Politically powerful African-American leaders made it clear that if not enough blacks were eligible for promotion, then no whites should be promoted either. One was the Rev. Boise Kimber, who disrupted meetings of the city's civil service board and warned its members of a "political ramification" if they certified the exam results. Kimber was a key vote-getter for Mayor DeStefano, who had made the minister chairman of New Haven's Board of Fire Commissioners despite his 1996 felony convictions (reported by the New Haven Register) for perjury and stealing money from an elderly woman's burial fund.

The city's other reasons for wanting to give more promotions to minority firefighters -- diversifying the upper ranks, and providing role models for younger black and Hispanic firefighters -- are entirely laudable. But at what cost to those who work hard and play by the rules only to be turned aside for being the wrong color?

"Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race," Obama said in his much-acclaimed March 18 speech about race. "So when they ... hear that an African-American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed ... resentment builds over time."

So it does. But based on Obama's record and the views of the civil-rights specialists on his transition team, there is every reason to worry that he will appoint civil-rights enforcers, judges, and justices bent on perpetuating the race-based discrimination against whites (and Asians) in many walks of life that is exemplified by the New Haven firefighter case.

I suspect that deep down, Obama would appreciate the simple injustice of the New Haven firefighter case. It would be most interesting to find out.

Edited December 12, 2008 by hudson144

[hudson144 150]

Sorry guys,had to wait for my 12 yr old to cut n paste lol, jjc

[BKeane 0]

its a shame that the idea of being "politically correct" and well-intentioned movements such as affirmative action and equal rights have gotten so wildly out of control... Its sad to see that the most qualified individuals aren't being rewarded with the deserved leadership positions, especially in a line of work where sometimes you only get one chance to make the right decisions and take the right actions...

I wonder if John Q Public really cares who or what you are when you are trying to save a loved ones life.

[eckyphats 0]

hope they win!

[hudson144 150]

UPDATE: No decision has been made at this point, hopefully soon with results in the favor of the "New Haven 20"

Edited December 16, 2008 by hudson144

[IzzyEng4 427]

Help our brothers in New Haven out. Go to thier website for support information. They are also have a page on Facebook as well.

http://www.newhaven20.com/

[CAM502 6]

Hey Hudson,

Didn't this happen in NY a few times too?

What ever happened to: Take the test. Do well. Hire the best qualified? Who cares what color you skin is....just give me the best for the job please.

[Goose 188]

This crap makes me sick. Maybe Michael Savage is right, maybe liberalism is a mental disorder...

[hudson144 150]

AKRON OHIO;Akron firefighters awarded $1.8 million in bias lawsuit

Federal jury says department's 2004 promotion test discriminated against race, age

By John Higgins

Beacon Journal staff writer

POSTED: 07:50 p.m. EST, Dec 23, 2008

A federal jury awarded 23 Akron firefighters nearly $2 million after finding that a 2004 test Akron used for lieutenant and captain positions skewed against white applicants for captain's rank and black candidates for lieutenant.

http://www.ohio.com/news/36663539.html

[FirNaTine 370]

Hey Hudson,

Didn't this happen in NY a few times too?

What ever happened to: Take the test. Do well. Hire the best qualified? Who cares what color you skin is....just give me the best for the job please.

The Fire Service has become nothing but a numbers game. Today, it's all about quantity, not quality. It's just a "Job" to many today, no longer a "Calling". What a shame, cause in the end, it's the Public who suffers!

[hudson144 150]

Yes Cam it did happen in NY, a case I am to familiar with! lol Subpeana's going out soon with depositions from those involved sometime soon!!!

[10-Buff-4 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090109/ap_on_...kNt4JG0jwBAw_IE

We'll see where this goes.

-Joe DA BUFF

[hudson144 150]

GREAT NEWS!!! I just got off the phone with Frank Ricci and yes the case is still alive with a projected court date in april!!! This could have been the end for the "NEW HAVEN 20" CASE! After 4 yrs of dealing with this and thousands of dollars spent they will have their day in court! Best of luck "NEW HAVEN 20"!

[hudson144 150]

Read This:

For Immediate Release: Media Contact

Cheryl Williams

(904) 554-6422

Cheryl_Williams777@yahoo.com

Supreme Court Decision on Firefighters Could Reverse Civil Rights Act and Put Nation In a Security Crisis

Jacksonville, Fla., March 1, 2009 – The International Association of Professional Black Firefighter (IABPFF) has taken issue with a lawsuit currently pending in the United State Supreme Court, Ricci vs. De Stefano, and will be filing an amicus brief, joined by several other prominent organizations and individuals, representing minority firefighters being attacked by the suit. At the core of this issue is keeping our firefighting forces diverse in the interests of National Security. The IABPFF position is clear: keep Title VII and Constitutional Protections alive for professional black firefighters/ first responders -- not merely for the interests of Caucasians, who have dominated the fire testing process for years.

The “ reverse-discrimination” lawsuit was brought by 20 white firefighters (known as the” New Haven 20”). The white firefighters alleges that they were discriminated against in denial of promotion, and complained that the City violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution by creating “racial categories” favoring African Americans on two promotional examinations. (Fire Lieutenant and Captain). The city had chosen (after holding four civil service public hearings) not to certify both exams because the results were slanted highly in favor of promotion of whites and the city believed any promotions would violate Title VII’s prohibition against disparate impact discrimination. The outcome of the lower court decision is as follows. Both lower courts sided with the city and found there was no “discrimination.” But, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case, likely for the purpose of making a sweeping pronouncement. There are key issues that are at stake.

Firstly, the Supreme Court ruling could potently turn back the clock on civil rights movements, decreasing minority integration around 40 years. Ricci vs. DeStefano, contains the issue of skin-deep diversity, brought about by the lawsuit challenging the fairness of a standardized test result, concerning promotions of firefighters in New Haven, CT. This case could possibly have a strong if not debilitating impact on municipal fire testing and the limits of city control over examinations, as well as possibly shoring up “reverse-discrimination” suits, using Title VII and the Fourteenth Amendment to further the interests of white firefighters at the expense of minorities and women. It is important to bear in mind that protecting diversity in municipal firefighting forces is truly a matter of National Security and compelling state interest.

The white firefighters want the Court to hold that any race-based remedies for African-American workers, particularly fire and police, are swept out of existence. This includes settlements, consent decrees, and possibly entire right of action under Title VII or the U.S. Constitution. Because of the increasing influx of “reverse discrimination” complaints and expiration of many hiring and promotional consent decrees, fewer African-Americans are represented in city fire departments around the country, particularly at the command level.

Moreover, many of those at command level – who fought so hard to get there – will soon be retiring, restoring fire departments, composition as largely Caucasian. This depletion in the number of diverse first responders (approximately 70%) is clearly not in the best interest of American security; this is borne out by the U.S. military’s heavy reliance on diversity at both lower and command ranks. As “paramilitary” organizations, similarly structured, municipal fire and rescue departments are truly first responders in national emergencies.

The position of the IABPFF is stated simply Addington Stewart, Director of IABPFF/SCR: “The Supreme Court hearing his case is the greatest threat to the future Blacks in the Fire Service and is the greatest challenge blacks have ever faced in the Fire Service. Should and if the high court reverse the decision, it will have monumental effect on Blacks being fire fighters and Blacks being officers in their respective cities. Should and if this is allowed to happen, then cities across the country will not have to justify whether a test is valid, discriminatory or whether it has a disparate or adverse impact on blacks as firefighters and first responders.”

The focus of IABPFF is to protect their the Title VII and Constitutional rights of all firefighters and officers, especially those of Blacks, other minorities, and women, who have historically been shut out of firefighting command positions. It also impacts the integrity of and the integrity of municipal fire testing itself. This is not a” touchy-feely diversity issue.” Black Firefighters are Emergency First Responders, and keeping diversity in all ranks is a compelling state interest to our National Security.

[hudson144 150]

Buffalo NY--This past week in court Judge John Curtin threw out the case M.O.C.H.A (men of color helping all) VS Buffalo, the lawsuit claimed that the testing process was biased,through testimony of several professional test writing individuals who are involved with writing tests for NYS civil service the judge threw it out because of the fact that it was proven in court that the testing was fair! This applys to all of us in NYS.

[steve shryock 0]

since there are so many associations for people of color why not start an association for caucassion firefighters?

That's right, in this world of hypocracy that would be racist, and who'd be screaming that: Vulcans and ACLU

but what do they care, give them all they want because they are different based on skin color.

BS. we all bleed red. if these groups want equality then that's what it should be EQUAL. TOUGH IF YOU DID NOT PASS>

To JC & Frank: GIVE EM HELL. You should have had that bar on your sleeve years ago.

Edited March 15, 2009 by steve shryock