See also: National Origin Discrimination

     A HUD employee claimed that his lateral transfer to a different job assignment constituted race discrimination. A federal appeals court upheld summary judgment for the employer because such lateral transfers were not materially adverse employment actions as required to support race and national origin discrimination claims under Title VII. Ortiz-Diaz v. HUD, #15-5008, 2016 U.S. App. Lexis 13980, 129 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 641 (D.C. Cir.).
     A police detective resigned from the department after suffering two strokes six weeks apart. The second stroke rendered him unable to perform his duties as a detective. He sued for discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act, arguing that the municipality failed to reasonably accommodate him after his return to work following the first stroke by not allowing him to work exclusively at a desk. A federal appeals court upheld summary judgment for the employer. A Title VII claim for race and national origin discrimination occurring years before was time barred as it was not filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged discrimination, and the ADA claim was deficient because of the fact that the plaintiff's doctor recommended that he work "part-time" following his first stroke. The court noted that the employer allowed him to work part-time after the first stroke and granted a request to extend his leave following his second stroke in order to permit him to stay on the employer provided health insurance plan. Swanson v. Village of Flossmoor, #14-3309, 2015 U.S. App. Lexis 12804, 31 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1560, 127 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1272 (7th Cir.).
    A black woman claimed that a state Department of Transportation's State Highway Administration refused to hire her for two different positions that she applied for because of her race and sex, despite her being "highly qualified." She claimed that the employer's decision makers were biased and "pre-determined" that they would only hire white applicants for the jobs. A federal appeals court upheld the dismissal of the lawsuit, finding that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege any facts that supported her claims that the employer discriminated against her because she was African-American or female. An adequate complaint must allege more than a "sheer possibility" that an employer has acted unlawfully. McCleary-Evans v. Maryland Department of Transportation, #13-2488, 780 F.3d 582 (4th Cir. 2015).
     A woman who worked as a Lieutenant trainer for a state law enforcement department claimed that she was denied promotion to the position of Training Director on the basis of her white race, instead promoting a black less qualified officer of lower rank to fill the position. A federal appeals court found that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the employer, since the plaintiff presented evidence which, if believed by a jury would have established "a fumbling, bumbling case of determined efforts" to deny the plaintiff the promotion on the basis of race. The employer failed to offer a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for its promotion decision. McMullin v. MS Dept of Public Safety, #14-60366, 2015 U.S. App. Lexis 5523 (5th Cir.).
      A Hispanic police officer was promoted to sergeant. He claimed that the department and police chief subsequently failed to promote him to lieutenant and initiated a number of internal affairs investigations into his conduct that were based on his race or national origin. He also claimed that the police chief retaliated against him because he spoke out at a press conference about an incident in which some of the city's officers used excessive force against a Hispanic person, in violation of his First Amendment rights. The court rejected these claims, finding that the officers had failed to show that reasons given for the failure to promote him, such as a pending hearing on misconduct charges, were pretextual, or that discriminator animus motivated the investigations against him. As for the First Amendment retaliation claim, while the appeals court agreed that speaking out concerning alleged excessive use of force by the department against Hispanics was a matter of public concern, the police chief was entitled to qualified immunity from liability. The court found no evidence that the chief decided not to promote the plaintiff or initiated the investigations against him for any retaliatory reason. Garcia v. Hartford Police Department, #11-4618, 2013 U.S. App. Lexis 1920 (2nd Cir.).
    An African-American police officer was terminated after he blew the whistle on a detective and fellow officer in connection with a missing persons investigation he assisted them in, and in which the three of them failed to arrest two suspects or collect certain evidence in what later turned into a murder prosecution. The detective and other officer, both of whom are Caucasian were only recommended for suspension by the same Internal Affairs investigation that resulted in his firing. A jury awarded him $3.5 million on a whistleblowing claim, $2.5 million on as a breach of contract claim, and $500,000 (half compensatory and half punitive damages) on a race discrimination claim for the disparate discipline. An intermediate state appeals court overturned the whistleblowing and contractual awards, while upholding the race discrimination disparate discipline award. The city was protected from the whistleblowing claim by sovereign immunity, since whistleblowing is a tort rather than contract cause of action. As for the contract claim; it was based on statute saying that non-probationary officers can only be fired for cause, the court found that it was not a "contract." Holmes v. Kansas City Bd. of Police Cmsnrs., #WD72852, 364 S.W.3d 615, 2012 Mo. App. Lexis 133.
     A part-time police officer, who was born in Jordan, sued the city that employs him, claiming that he suffered national origin discrimination when he was passed over for promotion to full-time positions that became available. While he claimed that a police captain made derogatory statements about him, he failed to show that the captain was a decision-maker with input into the promotion decision. The police chief indicated that he made hiring decisions himself, and there was no evidence of discriminatory animus on the part of the chief. There was also evidence that other candidates were hired for the full time positions because they were better qualified, had more experience, there had been a citizen complaint against the plaintiff, and there was a concern that the plaintiff might be unable to work rotating shifts because of his ownership of gas stations. There was no indication that these stated reasons were a pretext for discrimination. Othman v. City of Country Club Hills, #11-1142, 2012 U.S. App. Lexis 4175 (8th Cir.).
     A federal appeals court has upheld the invalidation of a requirement that applicants for jobs with the fire department be local residents, agreeing with a finding that it has a disparate impact on African-American applicants. Statistical analysis indicated that the department should employ approximately sixty-five African-American firefighters, but under the residency rule currently employed only two. The department services five municipalities with heavy Hispanic populations. The residency requirement was not supported by a business necessity justification in that it was not linked to the minimum qualifications for firefighter jobs. The NAACP v. N. Hudson Regional Fire & Rescue, #10-3965, 2011 U.S. App. Lexis 24562.
     Based on budgetary considerations, a county decided that it could make do with one dentist at its jail, eliminating four dentist jobs. Because an African-American dentist was the one kept on staff, a Caucasian dentist sued, claiming race discrimination. Rejecting this claim, a federal appeals court found that there was sufficient evidence to support a determination that the selection was based on merit, and that the African-American dentist was more qualified than the plaintiff. Everett v. Cook County, #10-1975, 2011 U.S. App. Lexis 17681 (7th Cir.).
     A city discarded the results of its firefighter promotional exams because of concerns that the exams had a discriminatory disparate impact on African-American candidates. Following this, the city was sued by non-African-Americans who claim that abandoning of the test results caused them to be discriminated against and lose promotions. The U.S. Supreme Court in Ricci v. DeStefano, #07-1428, 129 S. Ct. 2658 (2009) ruled that the city should certify the test results and grant promotions based on them. A federal appeals court subsequently held that African-American candidates can now themselves pursue their claim that the tests have a discriminatory disparate impact against them. The U.S. Supreme Court's prior ruling did not preclude their claims. Briscoe v. City of New Haven, #10–1975, 2011 U.S. App. Lexis 16834 (2nd Cir.) .
    A city was justified in deciding not to hire a police applicant who was born in Afghanistan. Serious concerns about his temperament because of his reaction during an interview to questions about apparent discrepancies in his application did not amount to a pretext for race or national origin discrimination. The applicant argued with the interviewer concerning whether he had once been a suspect in an assault case and had received reprimands from an earlier employer, facts uncovered in the screening process which were not revealed on his application. Amini v. City of Minneapolis, #10-2888, 2011 U.S. App. Lexis 13641, 112 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1089 (8th Cir.).
     When a Hispanic police officer was denied a requested transfer to Internal Affairs after repeatedly complaining of racial discrimination, there was sufficient evidence to support a jury verdict finding unlawful retaliation. The jury's award of $90,000 under Title VII and $90,000 under a District of Columbia law, however, was an improper double recovery, since both retaliation claims involved the same facts and were seeking the same relief. The jury rejected the officer's racial discrimination claims. Medina v. District of Columbia, #10-7094, 643 F.3d 323 (D.C. Cir. 2011)
     An African-American correctional employee failed to show that he was terminated because of his race after he was accused of sexually harassing a female co-worker. There was no proof that the plaintiff was treated differently, on the basis of race, than others accused of sexual harassment. Another employee accused of harassment was not terminated, but this occurred as a result of engaging in a grievance process to keep his job. The plaintiff, in contrast, did not file a grievance when terminated, but instead resigned. The court also noted that the termination was supported by an internal investigation showing that the sexual harassment had occurred. Luster v. Ill. Dept. of Corrections, #09-4066, 2011 U.S. App. Lexis 14730 ((7th Cir.).
     The FDNY's use of written exams in selecting entry-level firefighters violated Title VII. The city's use of the examinations discriminated against black and Hispanic applicants. United States v. City of New York, #07-cv-2067, 731 F.Supp.2d 291, 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 78641, 110 FEP Cases (BNA) 203 (E.D.N.Y.).
     The act of decommissioning a black corrections officer and transferring him while conducting an internal investigation is not a constructive discharge. The plaintiff “was one of many suspects in a wide-ranging investigation of custodial sexual misconduct. He has not shown that improper motivations – as opposed to corroborated evidence of wrongdoing – caused the defendants to take action against him.” Swearnigen-El v. Cook County Sheriff’s Dept., #09-2709, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 8379 (7th Cir.).
     Federal judge orders the City of New York to take several corrective actions to reverse years of intentional discrimination against minority applicants to the Fire Department. 7,400 minority applicants will have an opportunity to apply for compensation and 293 applicants must be given priority hiring status and retroactive seniority. The ruling is based on discriminatory testing in 1999 and 2002. United States v. City of New York, #07-CV-2067, PACER Doc. 385, 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 2506, 108 FEP Cases (BNA) 415 (E.D.N.Y.).
     Seventh Circuit rejects a race claim brought by a former corrections officer. The plaintiff, who is African-American, was prosecuted (and acquitted) of sexual misconduct with a current inmate. A white officer was not prosecuted for intimate relations with a former inmate. Moreover, the fact that the plaintiff was acquitted of the criminal charges does not demonstrate a pretextual motive, because the state had a higher burden of proof at trial than was required before the merit board. Egonmwan v. Cook County Sheriff’s Dept., #09-2764, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 8376 (7th Cir.).
     Federal court approves a potential $20 million settlement for NYPD Latino and African American police officers. Court also allows $4.8 million in attorneys' fees. Latino Officers Assn. v. City of New York, #99-CV-9568 - and - Guardians Assn. of the Police Dept. of N.Y. v. City of New York, #99-CV-4960; settlement rptd. at 42 (2077) G.E.R.R. (BNA) 930 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). Interim rulings at 2004 U.S. Dist. Lexis 10311; 2003 U.S. Dist. Lexis 11794, 11792, 10669, 10057, 6506, 5760, 5664 and 4863; 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 14348; and 2000 U.S. Dist. Lexis 11936. [2004 FP Dec]
     Federal jury awards $475,000 to a black Haitian city worker who claimed promotional discrimination because of his race and national origin. St. Fleur v. City Fort Lauderdale, #00-7884, 41 (2029) G.E.R.R. (BNA) 1028 (S.D. Fla. 2003). {N/R}
     Federal court rejects a promotion discrimination suit filed by a black lawyer in the Justice Dept. Although he characterized the position sought as a "promotion," it was a lateral movement with the same pay and benefits. "...a plaintiff who is ... denied a lateral transfer ... does not suffer an actionable injury unless there are some other materially adverse consequences ..." Stewart v. Ashcroft, 211 F.Supp.2d 166, 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 13548, 90 FEP Cases (BNA) 611 (D.D.C. 2002). {N/R}
     Federal appeals court upholds the firing of 33 probationary officers, 32 of whom are minorities. Exams mirrored the content and emphasis of the police academy curriculum. Bew v. City of Chicago, #00-1867, 252 F.3d 891, 85 FEP Cases (BNA) 1675, 2001 U.S. App. Lexis 9247 (7th Cir. 2001). [2001 FP 91-2]
     Fact that defendant county destroyed personnel records in violation of Title VII regulations entitled the promotional candidate to a favorable evidentiary inference, which is not overcome by some proof that other candidates were more qualified. Shipley v. Dugan, 874 F.Supp. 933 (S.D.Ind. 1995). {N/R}
     Black and Hispanic applicants for government employment or promotions win a consent decree regarding the use of the federal Professional and Administrative Career Examination (PACE) to assess applicants in over a hundred entry-level job categories. Luevano v. Campbell, #79-0271, 93 F.R.D. 68, 1981 U.S. Dist. Lexis 18023, 27 FEP Cases (BNA) 721 (D.D.C. 1981); modified sub nom Luevano v. Horner, 1988 U.S. Dist. Lexis 15805 and 15811; 1988 U.S. Dist. Lexis 15822, 60 FEP Cases (BNA) 1371 (D.D.C. 1988). {N/R}
     A person of Arabian ancestry, although a "Caucasian," is protected from racial discrimination under 42 U.S. Code Sec. 1981 were then considered to be a single race. "... a distinctive physiognomy is not essential to qualify for 1981 protection." St. Francis Coll. v. Al-Khazraji, 481 U.S. 604 (1987). {N/R}
     Also see EEOC regulations at www.eeoc.gov/regs/