Civil Attorney Attorneys Directory Cities we Work in States We work in Contact Us  

Civil Attorneys

Battle Lines Form On New Rights Bill


A top Justice Department official said today that hiring and promotion quotas favoring minority members and women are prevalent in American society and that a civil rights bill pending in Congress would only make quotas more pervasive.

“Quotas, regrettably, are alive and well,” the official, John R. Dunne, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, told the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights.

Mr. Dunne’s statement was the first official response to the introduction of the proposed Civil Rights Act of 1991, which is meant to counter discrimination in hiring and promotions. A somewhat weaker bill was passed by Congress last year, but President Bush vetoed it.

The two sides remain far apart on the bill as indicated by Mr. Dunne’s remarks, including his comments about one of the Supreme Court rulings that the bill is intended to circumvent.

That case was Wards Cove Packing Company v. Antonio. Backers of the legislation say the ruling made it easier for companies to defend hiring practices that exclude minority groups or women. If businesses find it difficult to prevail in court cases, these proponents say, they will turn to quotas to avoid litigation. A Changing in Position

Last year the Bush Administration, which had been seeking to reduce traditional support of Democrats among blacks, conceded the need to modify the Court’s 1989 decision.

Today Mr. Dunne indicated a harder Administration line. He disputed the contention that the ruling made it too easy for companies. He cited a Justice Department study showing that in Federal cases since the Court’s ruling, plaintiffs had prevailed nearly as many times as the defendant.

Like the bill vetoed last year, the new measure would overturn the Wards Cove ruling and five other Court decisions that the civil rights groups contend have seriously weakened Federal anti-employment discrimination laws. It would also amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to permit victims of intentional job discrimination to win larger monetary awards in court.

More : query.nytimes.com



Our Attorney Network
Accident Admiralty Adoption Arbitration Asbestos Bankruptcy
Business Child Civil Consumer Criminal Discrimination
Divorce Drug Dui Dwi Estate Planning Family
Federal Immigration Injury Insurance Juvenile Labor
Lemon Law Litigation Maritime
Medical Malpractice Mesothelioma Personal Injury
Real Estate Sex Crimes Sexual Harassment Tax Traffic Wrongful Death
About Us : Disclaimer : Privacy Policy : Feedback Form : Contact Us
© Civil Attorneys Powered by: USA Attorney Network