Reflecting on Ricci v. DeStefano event

By Brianna Wallen

News Editor

The historic affirmative action case Ricci v. DeStefano, which involved the promotion tests and practices of the New Haven Fire Department, on April 22, 2009.  

Firefighters filed a lawsuit against Mayor DeStefano and the City of New Haven, claiming that race was an undue influence in the hiring process. In a 5-4 decision split on June 29, 2009, the Supreme Court ruled in Ricci’s favor. According to the majority, the city had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by eliminating exams. 

Despite thecase being over a decade old, it still holds significance in today’s world. For this reason, a reflection on the case was held in Engleman Hall. Staff, students and community members were able to attend Reflecting on Ricci v. DeStefano: Affirmative Action and its Status Today from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.  

The discussion provided deeper insight into the case’s implications as well as the legal and political climate surrounding affirmative action today.  

Jonathan Wharton, associate professor of political science and urban affairs, moderated a discussion between Frank Ricci and former mayor John DeStefano Jr. to launch the forum.  

“The fact is, at the end of this case, when Victor Bolden, the Honorable Judge, came in, they came to the table with good faith on how we can resolve this issue, and how can we have a conversation and move this forward,” Ricci said.  

Following the debrief, a panel featuring local legal and academic experts, led by Theresa Merchant-Shapiro, a professor in the political science department, discussed affirmative action. 

Judge Victor A. Bolden of the United States District Court (District Judge of Connecticut), Professor Tolulope Odunsi-Nelson of Western New England University, Carol Platt Liebau of the Yankee Institute, and Julian Madison of the university were among the featured panelists.  

Discrimination cases similar to the landmark case also have an impact in the workplace. Odunsi-Nelson said that in today’s workplace setting, discrimination on the basis of race is harder to identify due to its high awareness of it being illegal.  

 “While society has transformed in its view of race, those who want to purposefully treat people disparately have also evolved and know how to do it in a way that perhaps can’t be identified and can’t be litigated in terms of the evidence itself,” Odunsi-Nelson said. 

With the possibility of there being a presence of intentional discrimination in the workplace and a lack of evidence, many workers remain silent about their injustices.  

“There are potential workplace culture shifts where there’s a chilling effect on the workplace,” Odunsi-Nelson said. “They see their colleagues pursue claims and lose, and it can cause people to not come forward.”  

Along with unsuccessful cases, Odunsi-Nelson said colleagues have also been able to work in industries or fields that they were a part of due to a public lawsuit that they pursued.  

While this factor can dim the light on discrimination in the workplace, Carol Platt Liebau said it is important to recognize the stipulations and efforts enforced to fight these grievances.  

“It does show that America as a society has really taken it onboard to try and address these things. We would not have the enormous legal and regulatory framework that exists if we were not trying to express a commitment to not engage in invidious discrimination,” Platt Liebau said.  

Platt Liebau said that after Ricci’s case, all parties involved, regardless of their different opinions, all had to return to their job, work together and go into burning buildings alongside one another.  

“I sometimes wish we as Americans kept that in mind as well. That we are, in a sense, all part of the same country, and that as we discuss these matters when it’s finished, we are all going to be responsible for confronting a lot of important issues together,” Platt Liebau said. 

VOL. 64- ISSUE 4