Christopher Donovan: Ricci Decision Hurts Whom, Again?

Christopher Donovan: It’s amazing the tidbits you find while crumpling up old newspaper for kindling for a Christmas fire. “Employers Hurt By Bias Decision” was the odd headline I spied in a July edition of LawyersUSA, a trade rag for the legal profession, while trying to get the logs to ignite.

My first thought was: Imagine a Supreme Court decision on a “civil rights” case benefitting blacks being described by the media as anything but divine wisdom revealed. “Decision long overdue”, “Blacks commend decision” or “Decision hailed, but more work needed” is more like it.

But as I read the story, the point was fair enough — in the wake of the Ricci decision, employers are put into yet another “sued if you do, sued if you don’t” situation. If an employment test keeps out too many non-Whites, tossing it out could get you into “Ricci” trouble. But keeping it in could get you into “disparate impact” trouble.

Of course, this is just the sort of impossible situation you’ll find yourself in when you try to reconcile the irreconcileable: a Black and Hispanic population that is inherently less intelligent than the white population, and a policy that requires equal outcomes for members of all racial groups.

Better headline: Whites Hurt By Multiracial Society. Watch for it soon.