DLL
5th Mar 2002, 03:14 PM
WASHINGTON, March 5 — A federal judge struck down the Army’s equal opportunities promotion process yesterday, saying the policy gives undue preference to women and minorities at the expense of white, male officers.
THE ARMY’S WRITTEN direction to promotion boards that urges them to consider the “past personal or institutional discrimination” faced by women and minorities is unconstitutional because the policy does not order the board also to consider possible discrimination against white men, the judge found.
“This undeniably establishes a preference in favor of one race or gender over another, and therefore is unconstitutional,” U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth wrote in a 68-page opinion.
The decision came in the three-year-old case of retired Lt. Col. Raymond Saunders, a white officer who was twice denied promotion to the rank of full colonel in 1996 and 1997. He retired in 1999 as a judge advocate general — an Army lawyer — and then filed suit.
His case is one of several filed by white Army officers, and a fewer number filed by officers in other branches of the armed services, that allege the military has been giving too much consideration to race and gender in promotions.
JUDGE: NO HISTORY OF DISCRIMINATION
Lamberth’s ruling, which legal analysts said yesterday closely followed Supreme Court precedent, finds that Army policies emphasizing race and gender considerations were not justified because the agency failed to show any history of discrimination against women or minority officer candidates.
If the ruling stands, it would require the Army to remove such considerations from its promotion process. It also would allow Saunders’s lawsuit to proceed, and to deny his claim the Army would have to prove that he would not have been promoted anyway.
You can read the rest here (http://www.msnbc.com/news/719442.asp).
THE ARMY’S WRITTEN direction to promotion boards that urges them to consider the “past personal or institutional discrimination” faced by women and minorities is unconstitutional because the policy does not order the board also to consider possible discrimination against white men, the judge found.
“This undeniably establishes a preference in favor of one race or gender over another, and therefore is unconstitutional,” U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth wrote in a 68-page opinion.
The decision came in the three-year-old case of retired Lt. Col. Raymond Saunders, a white officer who was twice denied promotion to the rank of full colonel in 1996 and 1997. He retired in 1999 as a judge advocate general — an Army lawyer — and then filed suit.
His case is one of several filed by white Army officers, and a fewer number filed by officers in other branches of the armed services, that allege the military has been giving too much consideration to race and gender in promotions.
JUDGE: NO HISTORY OF DISCRIMINATION
Lamberth’s ruling, which legal analysts said yesterday closely followed Supreme Court precedent, finds that Army policies emphasizing race and gender considerations were not justified because the agency failed to show any history of discrimination against women or minority officer candidates.
If the ruling stands, it would require the Army to remove such considerations from its promotion process. It also would allow Saunders’s lawsuit to proceed, and to deny his claim the Army would have to prove that he would not have been promoted anyway.
You can read the rest here (http://www.msnbc.com/news/719442.asp).