[CPEO-BIF] "Supreme Court Limits Scope of a Main Civil Rights Law"

[CPEO Moderator <cpeo@cpeo.org>]

April 25, 2001 
Supreme Court Limits Scope of a Main Civil Rights Law
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
NY Times
(excerpts)
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/25/national/25DISC.html?searchpv=site01

WASHINGTON, April 24 — The Supreme Court today substantially limited the
effectiveness of one of the most important civil rights laws as a weapon
against discrimination in the way federal grant money is used.

Ruling 5 to 4 on a provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the court held
that Congress had limited the kind of private lawsuits that can be brought
under the act to enforce a ban on discrimination in programs that receive
federal money. Suits could be brought only for intentional discrimination on
the basis of race and national origin and not over policies that have a
discriminatory impact, the court said in an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia.

The case before the court was a class-action lawsuit contending that the State
of Alabama violated federal law by requiring applicants for drivers' licenses
to take the written examination in English. Alabama, which like all states
receives federal law enforcement and highway money, is the only state to limit
its drivers' license exams to English. Two lower federal courts ruled that the
policy had the prohibited effect of discriminating on the basis of national
origin.

But the Supreme Court said today that private lawsuits were not authorized
under the law at issue, Title VI, which itself prohibits only intentional
discrimination. The law authorizes federal agencies to issue regulations that
bring their own programs into compliance with Title VI, and many regulations go
beyond intentional discrimination to also bar the use of federal money in
programs with discriminatory effects. The court said today that the "private
right of action," the ability of private plaintiffs to go to court to enforce
Title VI, extended no further than the law itself and did not apply to the
regulations.
...
Because few federally financed programs these days are overtly discriminatory,
suits for intentional discrimination are rare, while lawsuits alleging
discriminatory effects represent the biggest category of cases under Title VI.
Recently, for example, the law has been invoked in lawsuits asserting that the
placement of waste treatment plants in minority neighborhoods is a form of
discrimination.
...
Under Title VI, federal agencies can bring their own enforcement actions, which
theoretically can include a cut-off of the federal grant. The decision today
did not limit an agency's right to enforce its own regulations. But federal
resources for enforcing the law have always been limited. In a brief on behalf
of the Alabama plaintiffs, the Clinton administration said "private enforcement
provides a necessary supplement to government enforcement" of the regulations
as well as the law.

To read the entire article please go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/25/national/25DISC.html?searchpv=site01

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To read CPEO's archived Brownfields messages visit
http://www.cpeo.org/lists/brownfields

If this email has been forwarded to you and you'd
like to subscribe, please send a message to
cpeo-brownfields-subscribe@igc.topica.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxieR.aVGyPL
Or send an email To: cpeo-brownfields-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: cpeo-brownfields@npweb.craigslist.org

T O P I C A  -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
==^================================================================