Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Now up at Forbes.com: my reactions on Ricci

I’ve got an opinion piece up at Forbes.com on today’s Supreme Court decision in Ricci v. DiStefano, the New Haven firefighter reverse-discrimination case. The title: “Sued If You Do, Sued If You Don’t: Through the Looking Glass on Affirmative Action” (& link thanks to Ramesh Ponnuru, NRO “Corner”, Daniel Schwartz, Connecticut Employment Law Blog, Jon Hyman, Ohio Employment Law (to whom thanks for the kind comments as well), and Scott Greenfield, Simple Justice).

Filed under: , , , ,

7 Comments

  • Now up at Forbes.com: my reactions on Ricci…

    I’ve got an opinion piece up at Forbes.com on today’s Supreme Court decision in Ricci v. DiStefano, the New Haven firefighter reverse-discrimination case. The title: “Sued If You Do, Sued If You Don’t: Through the Looking Glass on Affirmative Actio…

  • Thanks for one heck of an informative and insightful piece digesting a nearly 100 page judicial decision. I am impressed and in agreement.

  • Nicely analyzed.

    • By Tom T.

  • Hey! Great photo, Walter!

    • By Robert

  • […] I’m in today’s New York Post with a second take on yesterday’s Ricci (New Haven firefighters) case. Link thanks: Instapundit. My first take on the decision, at Forbes.com yesterday, is linked here. […]

  • “Court: Discriminate — with discretion”…

    I’m in today’s New York Post with a second take on yesterday’s Ricci (New Haven firefighters) case. Link thanks: Instapundit. My first take on the decision, at Forbes.com yesterday, is linked here, and see also comments on it by Daniel……

  • Is Justice Kennedy saying that unfair tests are OK if they are not so blatant? The good justice often spins my head.

    The American public wants tests to be fair to all and to discriminate against nobody. Everybody is to score well above average.

    Then Justice Ginsberg made the blatantly ignorant statement that pencil and paper tests are problematic.

    At one time white state police officers in New York scoring less that 95 on the sargent’s exam were ridiculed by their fellow officiers. The exam was designed to have enough minority officers pass. That is so dumb! If quatas are desired, then race-norm. We shouldn’t throw away the valuable concept of test validity. By the way the minortry officiers would not accept the DNA evicence in the OJ case after having training in evidence at police school!