When the Supreme Court in 1971 first recognized disparate impact as a legal theory under Title VII, the Court explained that the absence of discriminatory intent does not redeem employment procedures or testing mechanisms that operate as ‘built-in headwinds’ for minority groups and are unrelated to measuring job capability. Forty years later, it is the built-in headwinds of a Supreme Court skeptical of - perhaps even hostile to - the goals of disparate impact theory that pose the greatest challenge to continued movement toward workplace equality. The essay examines the troubled trajectory that disparate impact law has taken in the Court\u27s jurisprudence, considering how the Supreme Court, Congress, lower courts and employers all interac...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the question of whether Title VIl...
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 permits plaintiffs to bring discrimination cases under two...
The disparate impact strand of antidiscrimination law provides the possibility of challenging harmfu...
When the Supreme Court in 1971 first recognized disparate impact as a legal theory under Title VII, ...
This Article examines the history of Title VII disparate impact law in light of the policy and poten...
(Excerpt) This Article focuses on judicial lawmaking and policymaking in an important area of antidi...
More than four decades ago, the Supreme Court concluded that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 19...
As Professor Richard Primus noted in his article, Equal Protection and Disparate Impact: Round Three...
Six years ago, Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the possibility that statutory disparate-impact stand...
Employment discrimination on the basis of race, gender, and ethnicity has long plagued America’s wor...
Ricci v. DeStefano, the New Haven firefighters case, raised questions about the constitutionality of...
Federal law has long prohibited not just intentional discrimination by employers, but also practices...
Reports of the death of Title VII’s disparate impact theory of discrimination in the wake of Ricci v...
[Excerpt] In Ricci v. DeStefano, the New Haven Firefighters case, whitefirefighters and one Hispan...
The Ricci case, where White firefighters challenged the constitutionality of disparate impact, neatl...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the question of whether Title VIl...
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 permits plaintiffs to bring discrimination cases under two...
The disparate impact strand of antidiscrimination law provides the possibility of challenging harmfu...
When the Supreme Court in 1971 first recognized disparate impact as a legal theory under Title VII, ...
This Article examines the history of Title VII disparate impact law in light of the policy and poten...
(Excerpt) This Article focuses on judicial lawmaking and policymaking in an important area of antidi...
More than four decades ago, the Supreme Court concluded that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 19...
As Professor Richard Primus noted in his article, Equal Protection and Disparate Impact: Round Three...
Six years ago, Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the possibility that statutory disparate-impact stand...
Employment discrimination on the basis of race, gender, and ethnicity has long plagued America’s wor...
Ricci v. DeStefano, the New Haven firefighters case, raised questions about the constitutionality of...
Federal law has long prohibited not just intentional discrimination by employers, but also practices...
Reports of the death of Title VII’s disparate impact theory of discrimination in the wake of Ricci v...
[Excerpt] In Ricci v. DeStefano, the New Haven Firefighters case, whitefirefighters and one Hispan...
The Ricci case, where White firefighters challenged the constitutionality of disparate impact, neatl...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the question of whether Title VIl...
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 permits plaintiffs to bring discrimination cases under two...
The disparate impact strand of antidiscrimination law provides the possibility of challenging harmfu...