American Constitutionalism in Historical Perspective (packet)

Employment –

1. 
   Washington v. Davis, 1976: allowed a test that was shown to have a disprop impact on black candidates because no invidious discriminatory purpose (were able to show an obvious non-discriminatory purpose for the test). Those that pass the test are more likely to succeed in the police academy. Need literacy conditions to fill out forms b/c bureaucratic. But no evidence that the test was connected to job performance. Ct is under enforcing.
   
   1. 
      Under Title 7 would have been struck down b/c based on theory of institutional racism: systemic educational disadvantage to AA that have hindered their mobility. Suspicion of tests that feed on this racist history and perpetuate injustice. Title 7 speeds up equalization process and mandates that tests measure job performance to prevent biased tests.
      
   2. 
      D/n do under Equal Prot b/c as voting rts more fairly distribtd, ct wants legis to do more.
      
2. 
   Civil Rights Act, 1965: easier to prove discrimination if implicate this statute. Involves the enforcement powers of congress, able to look more deeply into the matter.
   
3. 
   Personnel Administrator of Mass v. Feeney, 1979: allowed a military benefits reg that gave lifetime tenure to combat veterans, to the exclusion of women who c/n serve in combat positions. Gender becoming more suspect, but not at the Yick Wo level. Found no disprop impact, women can serve in the military & the reg had sufficiently non-discriminatory purpose. Marshall/Brennan dissent b/c goal c’ve been accomplished by less restrictive means.
   
4. 
   Griggs v. Duke Power Co, 1971: found a test similar to Washington v. Davis unconstitutional. Able to require that more proof must be shown of the link between the test and job performance. This case was overruled but later reinstated by Congress.