High Court Lets Stand Plan for Minority Job Set-Asides

The U.S. Supreme Court today refused to disturb a ruling that permitted a minority set-aside program developed by black workers and their employers to continue, despite claims of reverse discrimination.

The justices, without comment, rejected the appeal from the white government workers at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center at Robins Air Force Base near Macon, Ga.

At issue was whether the set-aside program could be found constitutional if the basis for discrimination was merely a statistical imbalance between the number of black people in the work force and those who held supervisory positions.

The white workers argued the black employees must show solid evidence of discrimination rather than rely on statistics to make their case.

In a series of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has taken a dim view of discrimination claims based merely on a statistical imbalance of white and minority workers and instead have held there must be some showing of discrimination.

However, the federal government, which under the Reagan Administration has pushed the court toward that view, argued against high court review for this case. The government stated that the case was an “inappropriate vehicle to resolve the broad remedial issues” raised in the case and disputed the view that the consent decree was merely based on statistics.

The Georgia case began in 1975 when 3,200 black employees filed suit under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging discriminatory promotion practices.

Eventually, the workers and their government employers agreed upon a plan under which 240 promotions were set aside solely for black employees hired between 1971 and 1979.

The action prompted a group of white workers to protest the plan, alleging their rights under the Fifth Amendment and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were violated because they could not be considered for the black-only promotions.

The case ended up before the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the set-aside program, finding that it did not violate the Constitution or federal civil rights law, and that using statistics was sufficient to show past discrimination.

In other action, the court:

- Refused to reinstate former White House aide Lyn Nofziger’s conviction on charges of illegal lobbying after he left the Reagan Administration.

- Ruled that federal judges may help plaintiffs in age discrimination suits try to find other possible victims and seek their participation in such suits. The high court said judges in such class-action suits may help plaintiffs locate other possible victims of discrimination, who may be unaware of the lawsuit, and solicit their participation.

- Turned away an appeal by an Iowa woman battling her state’s mandatory seat-belt law. The justices, without comment, refused to hear Linda Diane Clark’s arguments that the law, similar to those in most states, violates her constitutional rights.