By Emily Renwick
 
Today, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court reversed a decision set by Supreme Court nominee Sonya Sotomayor, and ruled that the City of New Haven, Connecticut discriminated against 17 white and Hispanic fire fighters.
 
The details of Ricci v. DeStefano are now familiar to those who have closely followed the Sotomayor nomination. The plaintiffs, led by Frank Ricci, were required to pass an exam to qualify for promotion within the New Haven Fire Department. At the time, the City of New Haven was making a large effort to promote minority firefighters.
 
Ricci hired a special tutor, quit his second job, and diligently studied for the exam. And his hard work paid off. Ricci finished with one of the highest test scores, qualifying him for a position as a lieutenant. The Department’s rules dictated that the top three scorers on the exam would be promoted. Once the Department determined that the top three scorers were all Caucasian males— and that the passage rate for African American applicants was half the rate of whites—the City’s independent exam review board moved to invalidate the exam results.
 
The district court sided with the City, and a three judge panel from the Appeals Court—of which Sotomayor was a member—affirmed the lower Court’s decision. Today, the Supreme Court overturned the lower courts, and  ruled that the City’s decision violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause.
 
In reversing Sotomayor’s enjoined appellate decision, Justice Kennedy’s Majority Opinion stated plainly that the City’s move constituted discrimination:
 
“Whatever the City’s ultimate aim—however well intentioned or benevolent it might have seemed—the City made its employment decision because of race. The City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white. The question is not whether that conduct was discriminatory but whether the City had a lawful justification for its race-based action.”
 
The bigger picture of today’s decision renews the wider concern about Justice Sotomayor’s statement that a “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.”
 
The Supreme Court’s action calls into question Sotomayor’s judgment on discrimination cases. Not only does this concern racial discrimination, but it also encompasses questions about discrimination based on gender, employment, age, religion, and national origin. How will this decision impact the outcome of Sotomayor’s confirmation?
 
The confirmation hearings are rumored to begin shortly after the 4^th of July Congressional recess. We look forward to the opportunity for Justice Sotomayor to address this case in the confirmation hearings, and to provide a clearer picture as to how she will balance racial origin with the democratic principle of equal protection before the law.