Supreme Court to Decide Bakke-Type Employment Issue

    NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC 
egal ‘efense und = 10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 10019 « (212) 586-8397 

SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE BAKKE-TYPE EMPLOYMENT ISSUE 

For immediate release For further information: 
Friday, January 26, 1979 Jack Greenberg or 

James M. Nabrit 
212-586-8397 

New York, N.Y., January 26 -- The affirmative 

action plan voluntarily adopted by Kaiser Aluminum 

Company and the United Steelworkers of America to 

increase craft training opportunities for minorities 

and women is valid under Title VII of the Civil Rights 

Act of 1964, argue the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF), 

the National Urban League and Howard University in 

an amicus curiae brief filed yesterday with the Supreme 

Court in Weber v. Kaiser Aluminum. Brian Weber, a 

white Kaiser employee, contends in his suit against 

the company and the union that their race-conscious 

Plan violates Title VII. The decision may be a sig- 

nificant one for civil rights law, having the same 

far-reaching implications for affirmative action in 

employment that the Supreme Court Bakke decision is 

having in education. 

-more- 

Contributions are deductible for U.S. income tax purposes 
The NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATIONAL FUND is not part of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People although it 
was founded by it and shares its commitment to equal rights. LDF has had for over 20 years a separate Board, program, staff, office and budget. 



Affirmative Action - 2 

LDF attorneys who prepared the brief urged the 

Supreme Court to approve the plan which was struck 

down by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. In arguing 

for reversal, the brief states that Congress did not 

explicitly consider the legality of race-conscious 

efforts to correct the effects of discrimination when 

it enacted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 

which prohibits discrimination in employment practices. 

However, subsequent interpretations of the Act established 

that it permitted, and in some circumstances required, 

the remedial use of race; these interpretations were 

later approved by Congress and codified by the EEOC. 

LDF further contends that an employer or union 

may adopt affirmative action if it has reason to believe 

it may be in violation of Title VII, or to remedy dis- 

advantages resulting from discrimination by others. 

The standard set by the Fifth Circuit decision - re- 

quiring proof or admission of discrimination - would 

end voluntary affirmative action. Under that standard 

the only permissible basis for affirmative action - 

prior discrimination by the employer or union - would 

not be effectively asserted because it would open the 

door to claims for damages on behalf of minorities 

and women based on the past discrimination against 

them. 

-more- 



Affirmative Action - 3 

The plan is valid, states the brief, because the 

company and the union reasonably believed certain 

employment practices were in violation of the law and 

wished to remedy effects of past discrimination by 

employers, unions and governmental bodies against 

blacks in the skilled crafts. 

The 122-page brief traces the legislative history 

of Title VII and judicial and executive interpretations 

of the Act, concluding that what Congress intended 

and what the Supreme Court has endorsed in past decisions 

is precisely what makes the Kaiser-Steelworkers plan 

valid in this case. The Supreme Court decision is 

expected this summer. 

Copies of the brief may be obtained by writing 

to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, 10 Columbus Circle, 

Suite 2030, New York, N.Y. 10019. 

NOTE TO EDITORS: The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational 

Fund (LDF) is not a part of the National Association 

for the Advancement of Colored People, though it was 

founded by that organization and shares its commitment 

to equal rights. For the past 20 years, LDF has had 

its own Board of Directors, program, budget, staff 

and office. 

=30— 



I 

ONPANY AND 

F TITLE ¥ 

TORAL ri c 

BY NED 

E AND EDU 

A 

Cir) 

a
 

pas 
sa 

oo 
at 

t 
La. 
Mats 
ea 

b 

ee, 
az 

6 
“o 

‘ 
Mad 

bem 
ol 

OF 
a
 

a. 
8, 

ey 
fact 

a
 

kh 
o
O
 

kt 
es 

ca 
te 

RE 
bem 

C
h
o
 

HS 
ah 

bt 
m
m
 

oe 
t
o
n
 

i
 

ee 
feet 

hike 
OE 
S
L
 

1 
co 

mo 
Crm 

T
o
s
 

i
 

Li, 
bem 

RE 
Mad 

em 
a
 
I
 

Bee 
and 

Ld 
Oe 

of 
0 

Crt 
er 

BI 
ae 

GS 
hy 

sat 
had 

Ce 
ba 

S
e
 

Me 
o
e
 

al Od 
<3 

Be 
at 

os 
ey 

S
t
 

Gm 
ch 

pee 
seed 

La, 
Se 
a
e
 

ot 

K GREENBER & -- JF