From the beginning of Eric Holder’s tenure as DOJ head he has used the cloudy social engineering concept of “Disparate Impact” to advance his civil rights position(s).
Not coincidentally the same DOJ, during the same AG tenure, has fought religiously to keep each case that used Disparate Impact (as legal standing) from reaching higher courts.
The reasoning is quite simple, “disparate impact” as a legal standard, while it might win you positional standing to drag a party to court, fails the “common sense standard” almost every time it is challenged.
“Disparate Impact” uses statistics of consequences to argue the legality of intent.
As an actual example, using real life current employment law, the application of “disparate impact” means it is unlawful to apply ‘legal work eligibility’ as a qualification for employment. Why? Because as a consequence of applying a standard where “you must be legally eligible for employment”, the standard itself has a “disparate impact” on Latino or Hispanic applicants – because Latino and/or Hispanic applicants are at greater likelihood to be ineligible as a consequence of their immigration status.
The statistics of “Disparate Impact” when applied to employment eligibility make it illegal to require “Legal/Eligible Work Status”. This is the Law. This is the current law as applied using the sketchy concept.
If any employer is found to be qualifying employment eligibility based on lawful work status, they are subject to penalty or legal action by the EEOC. If an employer tries to challenge the EEOC determination, the EEOC will tie you up in legal challenges and mount daily fines (all which must be paid within 30 days) as a tool to keep you from actually defending yourself in court.
In short, traditional EEOC rules (1964 civil rights act etc.) insured equality in opportunity – The modern EEOC rules (using disparate impact) try to insure equality in outcome.
So it comes as no surprise to find the recent Eric Holder DOJ has applied the same sketchy legal concept to their review of Ferguson’s LEO practices.
(Via Investors business Daily) Racial Politics: Unable to pin racism charges on Ferguson policeman Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown, Attorney General Eric Holder is using half-baked data to manufacture a case of racism against his entire police force.
Holder’s race-baiting civil rights crew combed through several years of Ferguson Police Department data on traffic stops, searches and arrests and “found a pattern of racial disparities in Ferguson’s police activities.”
“African Americans are overrepresented in FPD’s vehicular stops” and victims of “racial bias,” Holder concludes in his report.
He notes that blacks accounted for 85% of vehicle stops, “despite comprising only 67% of Ferguson’s population,” while whites made up 15% of stops, despite representing 29% of the population.
So there you have it, a slam-dunk case of racism, right? Hardly.
Outrageously, the nation’s top prosecutor failed to control for factors that explain the racial “disparity” in traffic stops, such as speeding, DUI, expired license plates, headlight, seat-belt and child-restraint violations and other reasons for being pulled over.
Holder’s own department statistics show that African Americans, on average, violate speeding and other traffic laws at much greater rates than whites.
The Justice Department’s research arm, the National Institute of Justice, explains that differences in traffic stops can simply be attributed to “differences in offending.”
Duh. For another example, “Seat-belt usage is chronically lower among blacks,” the NIJ says in a 2013 study. “If a law enforcement agency aggressively enforces violations, police will stop more black drivers.” (read more)