THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, April 18, 1995 TAG: 9504180290
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: FROM WIRE REPORTS
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium: 91 lines
With affirmative action under fresh scrutiny, the Supreme Court on Monday left intact two lower-court victories by white men who said they were victims of reverse discrimination.
In one case, the justices let stand a lower-court ruling that a plan for promoting black firefighters in Birmingham, Ala., unlawfully discriminated against whites.
And the justices let a white man collect $425,000 from a Pittsburgh company he accused of denying him a promotion because of his race.
Neither Supreme Court action was a ruling. Instead, the court made no comment as it left intact federal appeals court decisions in each case. The court, in effect, ruled without ruling.
Monday's action came amid growing debate in all three branches of government over whether affirmative action still is needed to help minorities - and whether such aid is fair to non-minorities.
Republican leaders in Congress are seeking elimination of most affirmative action programs. President Clinton has asked for a review of the more than 100 federal programs that use affirmative action.
And the high court is expected to announce a major decision by July on a white-owned company's challenge to a federal highway program that offers special help to minority-owned small businesses.
The Birmingham affirmative action case began when blacks alleged that the city and other local municipalities had discriminated against them in hiring and promotion. The parties reached an agreement in 1981, endorsed by a judge, that required certain numbers of minority firefighters to be hired and promoted.
The following year, white firefighters sued, saying they had been wrongly passed over despite earning higher scores on promotion exams. In 1989, the Supreme Court upheld the right of whites to challenge the plan.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision left intact Monday said that the inflexible hiring formulas used by the Birmingham Fire Department violated federal civil rights law and the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. The cases are Arrington vs. Wilks and Martin vs. Wilks.
No white firefighters lost their jobs as a result of the plan, and most promotions were delayed only by a matter of months.
In Birmingham, Lt. Charles Brush, president of the majority white Birmingham Firefighters Association, said, ``We've always contended this is not a race issue, it's a fairness issue.''
But Lt. Carl Cook, president of the all-black Birmingham Brothers Inc., said affirmative action ``has helped the whites who have cried and whined . . grease.''
In the Pittsburgh case, the court turned down Duquesne Light Co.'s argument that the award won by Frederick Claus should be overturned because there was no evidence of anti-white bias.
Claus joined Duquesne Light in 1964, and since 1985 has been its director of engineering.
In late 1987, Claus sought a promotion to manager of construction and engineering.
The job went to James Griffin, who is black.
Claus later was denied another promotion.
Claus sued Duquesne Light, and a federal court jury awarded him $425,000 in compensatory and punitive damages.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the award last December.
Claus's lawyer, Robert L. Potter, said the high court's action Monday was ``meaningless . . . to the validity of affirmative action'' because a Duquesne Light official had testified that Griffin's promotion was not made under the company's affirmative action plan. MEMO: TELL US YOUR STORIES ABOUT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
[For a copy of the graphic, see microfilm for this date.]
SUPREME COURT'S OTHER RULINGS MONDAY/A6
ILLUSTRATION: Graphic
HIGH COURT ACTS ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
WHAT'S AT STAKE?
The Supreme Court's action came amid growing debate in all three
branches of government over whether affirmative action is still
necessary - and whether it's fair.
WHAT'S NEXT?
The high court is expected to announce a major decision on
affirmative action by July. The case revolves around a white-owned
company's challenge to a federal highway program offering special
help to minority-owned small businesses.
KEYWORDS: SUPREME COURT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION by CNB