Here's another: what exactly is the application of the
now-famous term "deliberate negligence" to Liz's possible scenarios?
Where are our legal experts? Can we also have some indications of
exactly what path we need to follow through the legislative system to
have Congress reverse the slim majority in Alexander v. Sandoval? We
need clear and explicit legal guidelines to produce effective action.
Linda Purrington
Title IX Advocates
lpurring@earthlink.net
Liz Homer wrote:
What I am curious about is this: if it were shown that a policy had a
disparate impact then the agency/corporation/whatever would know
that it was causing a disparate impact whether that was the original
intent or not. Therefore, wouldn't it be intentional discrimination if
they continued with their policy?
If it were pointed out that some proposed policy or legislation would have
a disparate impact and the body went ahead with it anyway, wouldn't
that be intentional discrimination if indeed it proved to have a disparate
impact?
Also, if a body had a policy that was similar to another body that had
a policy that had been proven to have a disparate impact - perhaps even
found to be illegal in some earlier court case prior to the case in
question -wouldn't that be intentional discrimination?
Liz Homer
MI NOW Education Task Force
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Apr 12 2002 - 15:16:47 EDT