Citation network
Ricci Vs. Destefano
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 29, 2009
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Syllabus October Term, 2008 Ricci V. DestefanoSearch
-
s Equal Protection Clause. Such cases can provide helpful guidance in this statutory context. See Watson v. FortSearch
-
see also Wygant v. JacksonSearch
-
essentially, a threshold showing of a significant statistical disparity, Connecticut v. TealSearch
-
Ricci et al. v. DeStefanoSearch
-
et al., also on certiorari to the same court. Ricci v. DeStefanoSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Ricci V. DestefanoSearch
-
decision for petitioners on their statutory claim would provide the relief sought, so we consider it first. See Atkins v. ParkerSearch
-
Teamsters v. UnitedSearch
-
a protected trait. Watson v. FortSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
of 1964 did not include an express prohibition on policies or practices that produce a disparate impact. But in Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
We must interpret the statute to give effect to both provisions where possible. See, e.g. , United States v. AtlanticSearch
-
Firefighters v. ClevelandSearch
-
Corp. v. HulteenSearch
-
Scott v. HarrisSearch
-
Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. ZenithSearch
-
City to conclude it would face disparate-impact liability if it certified the examination results. See Celotex Corp. v. CatrettSearch
-
with the possibility of multiple candidates filling each rank) for purposes of the rule of three. See Kelly v. NewSearch
-
see also Chicago Firefighters Local 2 v. ChicagoSearch
-
and the cases are remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. Ricci v. DeStefanoSearch
-
Scalia, J., Concurring Ricci V. DestefanoSearch
-
But if the Federal Government is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, Bolling v. SharpeSearch
-
discriminate on the basis of race. See Buchanan v. WarleySearch
-
Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. FeeneySearch
-
Miller v. JohnsonSearch
-
Disparate impact is sometimes (though not always, see Watson v. FortSearch
-
might allow statistical disparities to play some role in the evidentiary process. Cf. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSearch
-
to make peace between them. Ricci v. DeStefanoSearch
-
Alito, J., Concurring Ricci V. DestefanoSearch
-
Honor Center v. HicksSearch
-
a large body of court of appeals case law on this issue, and these cases disagree about the proper standard. See EEOC v. BCISearch
-
Russell v. McKinneySearch
-
see also Poland v. ChertoffSearch
-
acted with discriminatory intent, see Hill v. LockheedSearch
-
Ginsburg, J., Dissenting Ricci V. DestefanoSearch
-
seen in command positions. In arriving at its order, the Court barely acknowledges the pathmarking decision in Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
Firebird Soc. of New Haven, Inc. v. NewSearch
-
F. Supp. 2d, at 157 (quoting Hayden v. CountySearch
-
forms of discrimination replaced once undisguised restrictions. In Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
Id ., at 432. In Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySearch
-
Chrisner v. CompleteSearch
-
did not, it was generally understood, suffice to establish business necessity. Williams v. ColoradoSearch
-
Moving in a different direction, in Wards Cove Packing Co. v. AtonioSearch
-
Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. AtonioSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial