Penn State Law clinic files amicus brief in case involving employment discrimination by police

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Penn State Law’s Civil Rights Appellate Clinic recently filed anamicus curiae brief on behalf of the National Urban League and the NAACP with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit arguing in favor of the employees in the matter of Lopez, et al. v. City of Lawrence, et al. 

The case addresses how to achieve equal employment opportunity for racial minorities in local law enforcement, which is an extremely important and divisive issue, as recent events involving police departments across the country have demonstrated. The U.S. Department of Justice and a number of local civil rights organizations have also filed amicus briefs on behalf of the plaintiffs in the case. 

In Lopez, the plaintiffs are black and Hispanic police officers who took the Massachusetts police sergeant’s promotional exam in their local municipalities between 2005 and 2008 and were not promoted.  The plaintiffs have demonstrated that the promotional exams used during those years had a disparate impact on racial minorities, meaning that, although there was no evidence of intentional discrimination, the tests selected applicants for promotion in a discriminatory pattern.  In short, the tests promoted significantly more whites than blacks or Hispanics. The defendants are local municipalities, including the City of Boston and surrounding towns, that utilized the tests created by the Massachusetts Human Resources Division and made promotions based on the tests’ results.

The First Circuit will decide whether the trial court used the proper standard to analyze the burden of proof associated with disparate impact claims.  Advocating for the black and Hispanic police officers, the clinic took the following positions:

• the trial court’s analysis of the disparate impact claim was hyper-technical and contrary to Congress’ intent in enacting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin;
• the trial court’s decision fundamentally departs from the intended purpose of disparate impact theory and its application to state and local municipalities under the law; and
• an affirmance by the First Circuit would severely limit the use of disparate impact as a means to achieve equal opportunity on a systemic level in the workplace generally and in state and local law enforcement specifically. 

The clinic was counsel of record in filing the brief on behalf of the two national public interest civil rights groups. The National Urban League and the NAACP are committed to furthering the goals of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and seek to provide employees with an effective means to address systemic denials of equal employment opportunities, specifically those that disparately impact minority applicants.

“The National Urban League is pleased to join Penn State Law’s Civil Rights Appellate Clinic to fight against yet another attempt to dismantle established civil rights law. For years, discriminatory exams have been used as pretext for denying African American and Latinos access to jobs and promotions,” says League President and CEO, Marc Morial.

The organizations recognize that the trial court’s decision and the reasoning behind it will directly impact the lives and employment opportunities of the people they are dedicated to serving. 

The clinic students who worked on the brief similarly recognized the project’s importance.   

“With the issue of police diversity brought into the spotlight following recent events in towns like Ferguson, Missouri, the clinic recognized that the work we did could have a meaningful impact on a national scale,” said third-year student Randy Keiser, Jr.  

Second-year student Melissa Rodriguez similarly noted: “The issue presented in this case is incredibly important to our country's current political and social climate.  Rooting out testing methods that have a disparate impact among minority police officers throughout Boston municipalities will bring us one step closer toward achieving equal employment opportunity in police forces nationwide.” 

Seth Evans, a third-year student, stated:  “This case represents an ongoing struggle in American anti-discrimination law over whether meaningless formalisms and technicalities will be allowed to freeze the status quo of racism, or whether the law will continue to offer meaningful tools to promote equal opportunity in the workforce.”

In addition to Evans, Keiser, and Rodriguez, second-year student Penelope Scudder and third-year students Al Alston, Darlene Hemerka, and Garrett Lent worked on the brief.

The Penn State Law Civil Rights Appellate Clinic provides intensive training in appellate advocacy by involving students in noncriminal civil rights cases before state appellate courts, federal courts of appeal, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Under the direction of Penn State Law professor Michael Foreman, students conduct research, draft briefs, assist in case selection, develop substantive legal positions, and plan appellate strategy.