When the city of New Haven tried discriminate against the police officers who passed their promotion test, because they weren’t appropriate ‘diverse’ for the PC crowd, the Supreme Court rightly struck it down.  Now, the Justice Department’s Civil Right Division is suing New Jersey for not discriminating on behalf of black and hispanic officers who don’t pass the written exam for promotion in the same numbers as white officers.  Though of course that’s not how they frame it.

The exam, a written test that New Jersey police officers must pass in order to advance to the rank of sergeant, quizzes candidates on state and local laws.

“This complaint should send a clear message to all public employers that employment practices with unlawful discriminatory impact on account of race or national origin will not be tolerated,” said Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department will take all necessary action to ensure that such discriminatory practices are eliminated and that the victims of such practices are made whole.”

Actually, what this complaint tells us is that it’s more important to bow at the alter of identity politics than to insure that police officers know and understand the laws which they are tasked to enforce.  Unless there is evidence that the test itself is inherently racist, i.e. that the questions somehow lend themselves to be answered better by white test takers than others, then there is no discrimination.  But there is no such evidence.

The entire argument of discrimination is based on nothing more than a few percentage points of difference between how white and minority candidates perform.

White officers pass the New Jersey test at a rate of 89 percent, as opposed to 77 percent of Hispanic candidates and 73 percent of African-American candidates.

So what? What percentage of right-handed and left-handed people pass the test?  What percentage of blondes and brunettes?  How is race any more relevant to understanding the law than these entirely superficial characteristics?  The fact of the matter is that races are not taking the test – individuals are.  Individuals who study and know the material pass, while individuals who are not prepared or sufficiently well versed in the law fail. Those who fail should not be promoted. Dicing these individuals into artificial categories and comparing passing percentages is entirely meaningless.

“Our suit does not have an issue with a written exam period, but we do believe it has a disparate impact on African-American and Hispanic candidates,” Alejandro Miyar, a spokesman at the Justice Department Civil Rights Division, told The Daily Caller.

Disparate impact is a little-known legal term that describes an employment practice that isn’t intentionally discriminatory, but which results in a discriminatory outcome. It is forbidden under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Disparate impact was first described by the Supreme Court in the 1971 case Griggs v. Duke Power Co. which found that “good intent or absence of discriminatory intent does not redeem employment procedures or testing mechanisms that operate as ‘built-in headwinds’ for minority groups and are unrelated to measuring job capability.”

One would think that understanding the law goes to the heart of measuring the job capacity of police officers.