I agree with Justice Ginsburg in that the white fire fighters had no vested "right" to promotion. The test was used to see who "would be" eligible...In addition, the test could have been contested by blacks and latinos as causing "adverse impact" if it WAS NOT directly job related. I belive the City and subsequently, Judge Sotomayer made the correct decision..

That an instance of open, blatant and virulent racism had to go to the Supreme Court is troubling.I want the best man on the job, not some second-rate affirmative action stooge.End Affirmative Action (aka "racism") now..

What do you think would have happened if 14 of the top scorers were black and one was latino? I wonder how the city officials would have voted then..

It is finally over that people can now be judged based upon their character, hard work, and diligence rather than their color. This test was carefully crafted to ensure that no bias existed by using a third party firm that is well known throughout the corporate world for removing all bias from tests. The firefighters had an absolute right to the promotion since it was a promotional exam no mater what their color. This was not an employment test since they were already employed but a promotional exam. Just because you don't like the results does not mean you get to get to do it again and again so you can somehow get the results you want. It did not have disparate impact; only in the fact that the firefighters who did not qualify as the best of the best did not equally study as hard for the test. .

The city had a justifiable concern with regard to "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964" and decided that the best approach was to decertify the test. They could have easily sided the other way. The decision the Judge Sotomayor was a proper one for such a gray area issue. All the Supreme Court did was to clarify that gray area so that future issues like this can be decided differently..

The focus of the orginal legislation was on the impact of de jure or systematic/institutionalized discrimination. Addressing the present affects of a previous or existing discriminatory process and/or procedure. The focus should not be on who passed the exam, but there aren't Black and Third World employees already in the position..

I'd like to know what percentage of whites, blacks and latinos took the test and passed. Does anyone have that info available?.

This decision is a prime example of why courts should not decide who they want to win, then twist the law to arrive at that result. The Court actually said that allowing the test results to stand would result in a prima facie disparate impact case for the minority applicants. Nevertheless, by not accepting the test results, the City was guilty of disparate treatment toward the White applicants. A classic case of "darned if you do and darned if you don't!" The decision is totally illogical and appears to suggest that the result might have been different had the minorities sued first. What a mess!.

My questions in all this are: Were the applicants given adequate time and material to study for the test? Were all things equal otherwise? (Meaning physicals, accommodations, years on the job, etc.) IF everything else was equal, then the supreme court got this one right. The point is suppose to be to hire the best person for the job regardless or race, sex, creed, religion, sexual orientation, etc. As long as the African Americans were not barred from later promotions or demoted, then they should have been told to study and try again next year. Just as any other Whites and Latinos who took the test and didn't preform well should have. I find it sad that we still focus on race so much in this country. Race, which is an arbitrary, social segregation method, is not important and should not even be asked on applications in my opinion. Ethnicity is another issue, but not one that should be considered for jobs either. We have an African American in the White House and we still can't get along. I don't know that this is progress at all..

I believe that it was incumbent on the city of New Haven to ensure, by seeking two opinions from firms respected for removing all bias from examinations, that the promotional exam was non-discriminatory. That would have precluded them from having to use the weak defense that "they feared racial backlash.".

I work in the Equal Opportunity/Human Relations field. I find it extremely irritating when people use the term "reverse discrimination" to describe unlawful discrimination against white individuals. Here's a news flash....the "reverse" of discrimination is equality people!!!! If a white individual is discriminated against because he/she is white....guess what?...that's RACE DISCRIMINATION. White is a race. *sigh* Felt good to get that one out there. Please tell all your friends. Maybe then people will stop calling unlawful discrimination against non-minorities or white individuals "reverse discrimination.".

The important thing here is not their race, but life and death situations!It was a promotion test, so I believe the best man or woman for the job / promotion / leadership has to be able to pass the test. Otherwise what is the point of giving the test if they do not promote accordingly? These firefighter's were discriminated against, and I am glad the Supreme Court ruled in their favor. Let's be fair to all people including theses white males that are willing to risk their own lives to save our families..

While it is difficult for me to believe that only 1 Latino and NO Blacks passed this "test". However, we are not all equal in either intelligence or experience, and if that was the case we'd all be rocket scientists or brain surgeons. I understand the city's perspective and I agree there was the possibility for a backlash, but if the test itself was a basic non-discriminatory test, whoever passed it should get their promotions regardless. .

I do not believe that race should be used to determine promotions. I beleive that such decisions should be based on merit and, where applicable, on race neutral methods for ascertaining job specific skills andknowledge.I am, however, disturbed at how this case has morphed into one where the Black firefighters are cast as the whining incompetents looking for a free ride, and the White firefighters are perceived as victims of social engineering run amok.Justice Ginberg's dissenting opinion makes the following points:1)In 1972, when Congress extended Title VII, "municipal fire departments across the country, including New Haven's, pervasively discriminated against minorities."2)The White firefighters had "no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."3) While New Haven's civil service rules specify that examinations "shall be practical in nature, shall relate to matters which fairly measure the relative fitness and capacity of the applicants to discharge the duties of the position which they seek, and shall take into account character, training, experience, physical and mental fitness" the city relied on a 20 year old practice from the firefighter's union contract that "a written exam, which would account for 60 percent of an applicant's total score, and an oral exam, which would account for the remaining 40 percent."4) Some of the firefighters who took the exam contended that a number of the questions "were not germane to New Haven's practices and procedures"5) Some participants had the necessary study materials before the sylabus was published; others had to "wait a month and a half for some of the books because they were on back-order."There is enough of a shadow to merit an examination of the testing protocol AND the availabilty of study materials. That, howver, is unlikely to occur with a SCOTUS made up of five ideological conservatives (four White men and the poster boy for Stockholm Syndrome).No doubt the right will try to use this verdict to continue to smear Judge Sotomayor. Had the SCOTUS been impartial they would have delayed this decision until after Judge Sotomayor's confirmation hearing. Now it will be part of that debate.Ultimately all this wailing and gnashing of teeth about the unfair advantage minorities are thought to have (as a 60+ year old Black man I know better) is nonsense. The hew and cry about the American "meritocracy" begs the question: if this is a meritocracy how did George W. Bush get elected? .

L. Ortiz: The important thing here is not their race, but life and death situations!It was a promotion test, so I believe the best man or woman for the job / promotion / leadership has to be able to pass the test.JL: I would agree that "the best person for the job should get the job."However, the problem lies in "how is the best person(s) chosen?"Two, the issue was not "race."It was "disparate impact due to cultural bias in the test used to determine whom would be promoted"The White firefighters' position was that "the test results should be allowed."The opposing argument was that the "ruling of an Appeals Court should be upheld ("test results should be thrown out")The overwhelming majority of assessment tests/instruments, IQ tests, and employment tests CULTURALLY FAVOR White applicants/clients/test takers.Tests can be developed to "culturally favor" men over women, Whites over People of Color (African-/Asian-/Latino-/ and Native-"Americans"), rich over poor, urban/suburban over rural folks, etc.For example, on the SAT, girls do poorly at reading, but just the opposite on the NAEP.As I understand it, there were two top fire dept. officials (one Black and one White)who hired a company to develop a culturally-neutral test for the promotions. The two certified the test as "being okay."However, do either of these two men have the necessary expertise to certify such a test?!I highly doubt it.An independent firm should have been hired to certify the test to be free of cultural bias.Unsurprisingly, when the New Haven case was discussed on a local talk radio show, a White male called-in and stated, "If you're screwing on a lugnut, do you turn it to the left or to the right?"Well, those types of questions are NOT asked on such tests.His statement is simply an indication that the public has been poorly educated on the content and purpose of these tests.Many of the comments thus far are largely reflective of the "lugnut" statement.Cultural bias can be seen very easily on such game shows as "Jeopardy."For example, very rarely are answers given for literature written by People of Color and/or any other cultural-based event, incident, quote, etc.I invite any of you to look at Jeopardy for a week and keep score on "what cultural group did the answer pertain to."I'd be willing to bet that "most of the winners" on the show, including Ken Jennings, would not be able to respond correctly 9 out of 10 times to answers that are NOT based on White culture....unless the answer is something very common, such as "She sang r-e-s-p-e-c-t."Yes, Trebek actually used that one.I've yet to hear a passage from a book written by someone like James Baldwin, Langston Hughes, or Mari Matsuda....always all White authors...just like "The Classics."As to IQ cultural bias, I am only tested on a small fraction of what I actually know....because IQ tests are again based on White middle-class culture.In a country like the US, which has been very diverse since the 1900s, the continuing use of assessment instruments based only on one culture is racist.However, the fields of social work, psychology, and rehabilitation counseling have begun assessing the instruments they use for evaluations and are slowly changing traditional ways of doing their work.Recommended ReadingR.K. and Rogers,H.J. (1996) Developing an Item Bias Review Form, which is available through ERIC/AE.Berk, R.A. (Ed.). (1982). Handbook of methods for detecting test bias. Baltimore,MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Chipman, S.F. (1988, April). Word problems: Where test bias creeps in. Paper presented at the meeting of AERA, New Orleans.Hambleton, R.K., & Jones, R.W. (in press). Comparisons of empirical and judgmental methods for detecting differential item functioning. Educational Research Quarterly.Lawrence, I.M., Curley, W.E., & McHale, F.J. (1988, April). Differential item functioning of SAT-verbal reading subscore items for male and female examinees.Paper presented at the meeting of AERA, New Orleans..

A very tough issue. As a white, I feel that I did what I had to in order to pass the exam for promotion. All things being equal, if 14 people passed and were otherwise qualified, they should be in the pool for possible promotion. From there anyone could be next to be promoted.As a manager, did the city do everything it needed to level the playing field. I mean did everyone have an equal opportunity to study for, take, and pass the exam.Was anyone promoted? Is there or was there another exam? Was the exam a totally unbiased one?So, after all of this it comes down to an interpretation of constitutional law. This court interpreted it in their own way.As I said, a very tough issue. .

I don't usually agree with THIS Supreme Court's rulings but this time they got it right. The City of New Haven responded in a childish and immature manner by trashing the test results. The focus should have been on the test itself: was it administered to a test group prior to the actual City firefighters to determine if the test was valid according to statistical measures? I would think not, since no one from the City of New Haven nor the independent testing firm has acknowledged that. Given what the Supreme Court was presented with and the negligent behavior of the City of New Haven, they really had no choice but to find in favor of the white firefighters. This case should have been resolved by test analysis and reconstructing the exam if analysis found it necessary. The City of New Haven took the cheap way out, tarnishing everyone in the end. .

Anyone can study!.

Did the test have a little box on top asking for the race of the firefighter being tested? Was this the way for whoever scored the tests to know who to give better grades to? C'mon, at least the Supremes actually used their brains this time..

As a black man I just have one question, Why didn't the blacks and latinos who failed the test file a lawsuit questioning the test? Until it is shown that the test was racially biassed-and in six years no organization, group, or individual-has made such a claim or given us facts to prove it was a racist test. And to C Daily, you are correct, no one has a "right" to be promoted, but they too, have have a right to fair treatment, and as MLK said content of character not skin color. RIGHT? .

The fact that people use the term, "Reverse Discrimination" concerns me. Discrimination is discrimination. That's it! The fact that "Caucasians" and other "non-minorities" get to enjoy the term discrimination to somehow create a bond of understanding traditionally suffered by minorities is ludicrous. Is it possible? Absolutely! Without further information, I cannot determine if the minority firefighters failed to study, lack the aptitude, or just not-ready! This is what I know. There is strong evidence of adverse impact against minorities. New Haven needs to determine why? If not, there will be the norm. "If you are black or Hispanic…forget it. You will never make it." Then we are right back where we started.I think the incorrect thing to do was to "throw out the test" thus creating discriminatory perceptions against Caucasians. They should've determined the reasons WHY the test has an adverse impact against blacks and Hispanics. This is why Diversity Managers are needed! A competent DM would NEVER have allowed the test to be thrown out. The best qualified should've been promoted! White or otherwise!.

As a former CT resident this case wasn't just about race, it was about perception and dirty New Haven politics. The test was carefully scrutinized by a company that placed a premium on diversity. The blacks and latinos in question for the most part didn't pass the written and oral portions of the test with the abilities required to lead in this dangerous job. Judge Sotomayer made the wrong decision and chose a short reply that was discriminatory based on race. She is clearly not capable of being a justice on the US Supreme if a one paragraph decision is the best she can do to render a judgement. .

I am a Latin , and while i have first hand experience with some discrimination . I will say that if you can't pass an exam you should not get preferential treatment because of your raceI refused going to particular college because i was admitted on quota systemI felt better about myself being able to attend another great school on an equal basis with othersEnough of this BS , we need a lower standard because we are a minorityI say we need higher standers, we need to be the best and better then the rest ...... .

What's the point in giving the test if they aren't going to utilize the results. Can I go back and get better grades from my college professors because I think they descriminated against me because of my race? What about the SAT?Makes it difficult to be certain about Sotomayer's intentions. If the exam was "de-biased" as J. Fuller suggests, then I think just about everyone would assume that higher test scores are an indicator of who should get the promotions.The reason why many people rightfully call for an end to Affirmative Action is the double-standard nature of fixing a wrong with yet another wrong. If American companies get nervous any time a less-than-diverse group of employees get ear-marked for promotion, then we will continue to undermine our ability to stay competitive. Why not just radomly select persons from each race until we have a statistical equivalent in each job type in the country. Every firehouse will have 2 white, 1 black and 1 latino. Every med school class with have 60% whites, 20% blacks, 15% latino and 5% other. Wasn't that Dr. King's Dream? To have statistically equivalent portions of population represented in every career and job type? Think of all the money we could save from not having to send people to school and take exams... .

John Lindsay- thanks for attempting to shed light on ignorance. We all suffer from it on one issue or another. It's not easy for the average person to wrap their minds around the concept that even assessments or test can be inherently racist. It's seen over and over again. In immigration laws (which can be considered legal tests on some level), in criminal laws like the Rockerfeller drug laws and definitely in case law thatThe problem in this country is that we are LAZY THINKERS. We don't question much of anything. We simply say wellhe broke the law and so what it is a "racist" law. Well, just study for the test and so what it is created to favor one group and disproportionately challenge another. We no longer know how to think deeply and that's why we are not growing as a nation. Regarding the case, I'm sure it will be overturned when the right questions are asked and some pensive legal projessionals and jurist (like Ruth Ginsburg)analyze the issues. Unfortunately, this kind of intellectual fire power is becoming more rare in the U.S. So, we will probably continue to see the kinds of sentiments expressed by a majority of the commentors..

There are actually many things I find problematic about this case. First I have to ask why more questions weren't raised about the test. Why so much weight was brought to the oral portion and why no one found it odd the way the results were handled. It seems to me the easiest way to discriminate against the minorities was to throw out the test without doing any investigation into why the results were considered biased. Now they can promote all white fire fighters after making the case for reverse discrimination. Reverse discrimination? What exactly is that in a country where one race makes up most upper management positions but barely half the population? And how exactly does Sotomayor's ruling prove she would discriminate in her decision making? It seems rather odd to me that the highest court in the land from the very beginning can have only white men who can rule without bias. And given the track record for the last 100 years I would say white men prove not to rule without bias. Sotomayor would bring her life experiences to her decision making as we all do. Isn't it way past time we had a court that represented all Americans? .