|
|
Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986)
Bazemore v. Friday No. 85-93 Argued April 22, 1986 Decided July 1, 1986 * 478 U.S. 385
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
The private petitioners -- who include employees of the North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service (Extension Service), recipients of its services, members of its Homemaker Clubs, and parents of youths that belong to its 4-H Clubs -- filed suit against various state and local officials in Federal District Court (the United States intervened as a plaintiff), alleging racial discrimination in employment and in provision of services by the Extension Service, in violation of the Constitution and various federal statutes, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court refused to certify various proposed classes and entered judgment for respondents, finding that petitioners had not carried their burden of demonstrating that respondents had engaged in a pattern or practice of racial discrimination. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Held:
1. For the reasons stated in the concurring opinion of JUSTICE BRENNAN, the Court of Appeals erred: in holding that, under Title VII, the Extension Service had no duty to eradicate salary disparities between white and black workers that had their origin prior to the date Title VII was made applicable to public employees; in disregarding petitioners’ statistical analysis because it reflected pre-Title VII salary disparities; in holding that petitioners’ regressions were unacceptable as evidence of discrimination; in ignoring evidence related to salary disparities presented by petitioners in addition to their multiple regression analyses; and in refusing to certify a class of black employees of the Extension Service, although the Court of Appeals was correct in refusing to certify a class of defendant counties.
2. For the reasons stated in the opinion of JUSTICE WHITE, neither the Constitution nor the applicable Department of Agriculture regulations required more than what the District Court and the Court of Appeals found the Extension Service has done to disestablish segregation in its 4-H and Homemaker Clubs.
751 F.2d 662, affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986) in 478 U.S. 385 478 U.S. 386. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=8GHSR5JUKDAHEB8.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986), in 478 U.S. 385, page 478 U.S. 386. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=8GHSR5JUKDAHEB8.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Bazemore v. Friday, 478 U.S. 385 (1986). cited in 1986, 478 U.S. 385, pp.478 U.S. 386. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=8GHSR5JUKDAHEB8.
|