LDF Tests Strength of '64 Rights Act Ban on Job Bias

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Collection
- Press Releases
Creator
- LDF
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 36e08b16-ba92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b

Cite this item

Press Releases, Volume 6. LDF Tests Strength of '64 Rights Act Ban on Job Bias, 1970. 36e08b16-ba92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/029a2108-54aa-41ce-9dd1-ec8c2495aa3d/ldf-tests-strength-of-64-rights-act-ban-on-job-bias. Accessed October 08, 2025.

Copied!

    joF 

Jia FE PRESS RELEAS! 
egal efense und 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. 
10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 10019 * JUdson 6-8397 

April 11, 1970 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

LDF TESTS STRENGTH 
OF '64 RIGHTS ACT 
BAN ON JOB BIAS 

Supreme Court Petition Filed This Week 

WASHINGTON, D.C.---A test of the efficacy of the fair emp. 

President 
Hon. Francis E. Rivers 

Director-Counsel 
Jack Greenberg 

Director, Public Relations 
Jesse DeVore, Jr. 
NIGHT NUMBER 212-749-8487 

loyment 

practices provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Title VII) is 

being sought in the U.S. Supreme Court by attorneys of the NAACP Legal 

Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) . 

Charging discriminatory employment practices at the Duke Power 

Company in North Carolina, the LDF filed a petition in the high court 

this week asking for a hearing in behalf of Willie S. Griggs and 

other black employees of the company. 

At issue is the use of tests and educational requirements in 

hiring and promoting workers which, the LDF contends, are not related 

to the job and serve only to exclude qualifiéd Negroes from better~ 

paying positions. 

LDF attorneys assert that “studies confirm a gross © acial dis- 

parity in test scores" and records of performance refute the notion 

that they produce better employees. 

"A test or educational requirement that is not job-related 

assures only that hiring will be on the pasis of educational and 

cultural background, which, at least in this society, is only thinly 

veiled racial discrimination," the petition states. 

If these tests are permitted, the LDF continues, the door will 

be open to other so-called "objective" criteria having similar racial 

effect, and equal employment opportunity will be "hollow rhetoric." 

The case is being appealed from the Court of Appeals for the 

Fourth Circuit which affirmed a district court opinion that allowed 

Duke to continue to impose the tests and educational requirements 

which allegedly discriminate against blacks. 

tHE 

E25

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

LDF Tests Strength of '64 Rights Act Ban on Job Bias

Collection

Creator

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in