U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Remarks of William Bradford Reynolds on March 4, 1983 Before the 1983 Mid-Winter Meeting, American Bar Association, Equal Employment Law Committee

NCJ Number
88721
Author(s)
W B Reynolds
Date Published
1983
Length
16 pages
Annotation
The assistant attorney general from the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Civil Rights Division highlights Title VII enforcement activities during the Reagan Administration's first 2 years and argues that hiring and promotional quotas should be abandoned.
Abstract
Contrary to media suggestions, the DOJ has not shifted its policy toward class action litigation, but has recovered large amounts of money for victims of unlawful discriminatory practices. Furthermore, statistical evaluations continue to be a regular part of investigations and trial preparations. The Civil Rights Division has been actively involved in over 100 employment discrimination lawsuits, insisting that prior discrimination be enjoined and that the employer only engage in nondiscriminatory hiring and promotional practices in the future. Employers who have offended the nondiscriminatory command of the 1964 Civil Rights Act are required to make special efforts to recruit minority workers and to report periodically on their progress. This requirement has produced greater numbers of qualified minorities applying for employment. Legal arguments for abandoning hiring and promotional quotas contend that racial preference for nonvictims of discrimination exceed the permissible limits of remedial authority under Title VII and tread unfairly on the interests of innocent nonpreferred employees. This position is exemplified in two pending cases, the Boston Firefighters and Police before the Supreme Court and the New Orleans Police case in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. An individual's rights must rise no higher nor fall any lower than the rights of others because of race. Thus, preferential treatment cuts across the grain of equal opportunity.