ALTHOUGH THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT'S INTEREST IN EFFECTIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT MAY NOT IN ITSELF BE SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY RACE-CONSCIOUS HIRING, RACIAL-BASED HIRING SHOULD WITHSTAND JUDICIAL SCRUTINY UNDER THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE AS A NECESSARY MEANS TO REMEDY PAST DISCRIMINATION AND RACIAL HOSTILITY. AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HIRING PROGRAM DOES NOT VIOLATE THE 14TH AMENDMENT, BUT INSTEAD TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 WHICH EXPRESSLY PROHIBITS DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RACE. CONGRESS SHOULD CONSIDER AMENDING TITLE VII TO ALLOW RACE-CONSCIOUS HIRING IN ORDER IMPROVE ESSENTIAL POLICE FUNCTIONS WHEN INEFECTIVENESS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT IS A PRODUCT OF PAST DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES BY THE MUNICIPALITY. THE VALIDITY OF THE RACE EMPLOYMENT QUALIFICATION UNDER THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE IS INDICATED BY A GOVERNMENTAL SHOWING OF COMPELLING INTEREST FOR CLASSIFICATION BY RACE. THE REMEDYING OF PAST DISCRIMINATION HAS JUSTIFIED CLASSIFICATION BY RACE IN SCHOOL DESEGREGATION CASES. UNDER THE HOLDING IN REGENTS V. BAKKE (1978) RACE MAY BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF GOVERNMENT BENEFITS WITHOUT RUNNING AFOUL OF THE CONSTITUTION. A PROGRAM WHICH WOULD PROMOTE THE STATE'S INTEREST IN LAW ENFORCEMENT REPRESENTS ONLY A SLIGHT VARIATION FROM THE COMPELLING INTEREST PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED BY THE COURTS. UNDER UNITED STEELWORKERS V. WEBER (1979) TITLE VII WOULD NOT PROHIBIT EMPLOYERS FROM VOLUNTARILY ADOPTING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (TWK)