Last year, I wrote about the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s ridiculous “disparate impact” lawsuit against Kaplan Higher Learning Corp. The Obama administration sued Kaplan for running credit checks on job applicants (similar, by the way, to the ones the EEOC itself uses), alleging it was racially discriminatory. Kaplan had learned that some of its employees had misappropriated student payments and, to provide safeguards against this behavior, it began screening its applicants for major red flags in their credit history. The EEOC sued Kaplan, arguing that it cannot use credit checks because they have a disparate impact on black job applicants.
Anyway, putting aside the inherent dubiousness of the whole lawsuit, there were also severe methodological problems with the Obama administration’s evidence, which relied on “race raters” to determine the race of the applicants by scrutinizing driver’s-license photos. So the trial judge threw out the case.
Wednesday, I’m happy to report, the court of appeals affirmed that decision — and in no uncertain terms, I might add, much I’m sure to the Obama administration’s chagrin.
Thanks for the pointer to the Pacific Legal Foundation, which filed an excellent amicus brief in the case that the Center for Equal Opportunity joined.