第七章:差别影响责任使几乎一切事物都具有非法推定性
Title 7 Disparate Impact Liability Makes Almost Everything Presumptively Illegal

原始链接: https://www.nyujll.com/volume-14/title-vii-disparate-impact-liability-makes-almost-everything-presumptively-illegal

在格里格斯诉杜克电力公司案(1971年)中,最高法院违背了压倒性的证据,将《民权法案》第七章解释为不仅禁止有意识和无意识的歧视,还禁止了“不同影响”(disparate impact),但允许以“商业必要性”作为积极抗辩。问题在于,如果基于种族、肤色、宗教、性别或国籍的“不同影响”并非普遍存在,那它也几乎无处不在。几乎很难找出一项用于筛选求职者的工作资格要求,不对某些群体产生“不同影响”。本文探讨了《民权法案》第七章下“不同影响”责任的历史、国会在1991年的默认态度、该理论赋予美国平等就业机会委员会(EEOC)的非凡自由裁量权、其在犯罪背景调查中的具体应用,以及有关其合宪性的论点。全文

抱歉。
相关文章

原文

In Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), the Supreme Court, against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, interpreted Title VII to prohibit not just conscious and unconscious discrimination but also disparate impact, subject to an affirmative defense of business necessity. One problem is that, if disparate impact based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin is not universal, it is nearly so. It is difficult to come up with a job qualification that has been actually used to select one job applicant over another that does not have a disparate impact on some group. This article explores the history of disparate impact liability under Title VII, Congress’s apparent acquiescence in 1991, the extraordinary discretion it gives to the EEOC, its application to criminal background checks in particular, and arguments concerning its constitutionality.

Full Article

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com