Washington v. Davis (1976)
Facts:
Unsuccessful African-American applicants to D.C. police force claimed
that verbal skills test unconstitutionally discriminated against them
because a higher percentage of African-Americans than of white Americans
failed the test. They claimed that there was no evidence establishing
the test's accuracy in measuring subsequent job performance, but NOT
that the test constituted "intentional" or "purposeful" discrimination
against them.
Issue/Holding: Is a law or other official act is unconstitutional solely because it has a racially disproportionate impact? No.
Reasoning/Major Points:
· Court holds that 1) there is a rational basis for test; and 2) there was no invidious purpose in administration
· The invidious quality of a law claimed to be racially discriminatory must be traced to a racially discriminatory purpose.
· This
is not to say that the necessary discriminatory racial purpose must be
express or appear on the face of the statute (J. Stevens's concurring
opinion elaborates on this). An invidious discriminatory purpose may
often be inferred from the totality of the relevant facts.
o Nevertheless,
the Court has not held that a law, neutral on its face and serving ends
otherwise within the power of government to pursue, is invalid under
the EP clause simply because it may affect a greater proportion of one
race than of another.
o Disproportionate
impact is not irrelevant, but it is not the sole touchstone of an
invidious racial discrimination forbidden by the Con.
No comments:
Post a Comment