Presidential Vetoes: George H. W. Bush and the Civil Rights Bill
In 1990 Congress passed The Civil Rights Act of 1990. The motivation for the statute was to provide a legislative response to a series of Supreme Court decisions which limited the rights of employees who had sued their employers for discrimination.
These were four of those cases:
1. Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1988): this case held that an employee could not sue for damages caused by racial harassment on the job, even if the employer's conduct was discriminatory. The court justified this because the employer had not denied the employee the "same right to make and enforce contracts as is enjoyed by white citizens".
2. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642 (1989): this case held that for the employees of Wards Cove Packing Company to prove that an employer's personnel practices, neutral on their face, had an unlawful disparate impact on them, they had to identify the particular policy or requirement which they alleged produced inequalities in the workplace and show that this policy, by itself, had this effect.
3. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989): this case held that, although the burden of proof shifted from an employee who had proved that an unlawful consideration had played a part in the employer's personnel decision, to the employer to prove that it would have made the same decision if it had not been motivated by that unlawful factor, such proof from the employer would constitute a complete defense for the employer.
4. Martin v. Wilks, 490 U.S. 755 (1989): this case gave standing to white firefighters who had not been a party in the litigation establishing a decree governing hiring and promotion of black firefighters in the Birmingham, Alabama Fire Department to bring suit to challenge the decree.
All of these cases were controversial. The Civil Rights Act of 1990 sought to address these issues. Under the bill, an employer whose hiring or promotion standards exclude racial minorities or women would be required to prove, if sued, that its standards "bear a significant relationship to successful performance of the job." The bill also authorized alleged victims of "intentional discrimination" to seek up to $150,000 in compensatory and punitive damages from an employer. At the time victims of racial discrimination could get such damages but victims of sexual, religious or national origin discrimination but their only remedy was reinstatement in their jobs or back pay.
The legislation also would have provided that employers, both public and private, could not engage in "racial discrimination" in any aspect of employment. Employers would violate the law if an employee's race, sex, religion or national origin became "a motivating factor" in a hiring or promotion decision, according to the measure. Also, plaintiffs would have two years to challenge a discriminatory change in a seniority plan, rather than the existing 180 days, and employees could not challenge in court a consent decree that settles a job bias case if they had "actual notice" in advance of proposed settlement.
On Monday, October 21, 1991 (24 years ago today), President George H. W. Bush vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1990 after negotiations to salvage it with amendments failed. Bush feared that racial quotas would be imposed. He said he was concerned that the bill would "introduce the destructive force of quotas into our nation's employment system." He added, "I deeply regret having to take this action, but when our efforts, however well intentioned, result in quotas, equal opportunity is not advanced but thwarted." Bush argued that the bill's standards were so tough to meet that quotas would be the only way a company could avoid lawsuits.
Supporters of the bill were upset with the decision. Arthur A. Fletcher, Bush's appointee as head of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, said that the bill was repeatedly watered down to meet Bush's objections. Senator Ted Kennedy, one of those leading the fight for passage of the bill, called the veto "tragic and disgraceful" and added, "when the chips are down, the White House is against civil rights." An attempt to over-ride the veto failed on October 24, 1990.
A year later, in 1991, Congress passed a watered down version of the bill, known as the Civil Rights Act of 1991. This bill providing the right to trial by jury on discrimination claims and introducing the possibility of emotional distress damages, while limiting the amount that a jury could award. President Bush signed this bill into law.
These were four of those cases:
1. Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1988): this case held that an employee could not sue for damages caused by racial harassment on the job, even if the employer's conduct was discriminatory. The court justified this because the employer had not denied the employee the "same right to make and enforce contracts as is enjoyed by white citizens".
2. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642 (1989): this case held that for the employees of Wards Cove Packing Company to prove that an employer's personnel practices, neutral on their face, had an unlawful disparate impact on them, they had to identify the particular policy or requirement which they alleged produced inequalities in the workplace and show that this policy, by itself, had this effect.
3. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989): this case held that, although the burden of proof shifted from an employee who had proved that an unlawful consideration had played a part in the employer's personnel decision, to the employer to prove that it would have made the same decision if it had not been motivated by that unlawful factor, such proof from the employer would constitute a complete defense for the employer.
4. Martin v. Wilks, 490 U.S. 755 (1989): this case gave standing to white firefighters who had not been a party in the litigation establishing a decree governing hiring and promotion of black firefighters in the Birmingham, Alabama Fire Department to bring suit to challenge the decree.
All of these cases were controversial. The Civil Rights Act of 1990 sought to address these issues. Under the bill, an employer whose hiring or promotion standards exclude racial minorities or women would be required to prove, if sued, that its standards "bear a significant relationship to successful performance of the job." The bill also authorized alleged victims of "intentional discrimination" to seek up to $150,000 in compensatory and punitive damages from an employer. At the time victims of racial discrimination could get such damages but victims of sexual, religious or national origin discrimination but their only remedy was reinstatement in their jobs or back pay.
The legislation also would have provided that employers, both public and private, could not engage in "racial discrimination" in any aspect of employment. Employers would violate the law if an employee's race, sex, religion or national origin became "a motivating factor" in a hiring or promotion decision, according to the measure. Also, plaintiffs would have two years to challenge a discriminatory change in a seniority plan, rather than the existing 180 days, and employees could not challenge in court a consent decree that settles a job bias case if they had "actual notice" in advance of proposed settlement.
On Monday, October 21, 1991 (24 years ago today), President George H. W. Bush vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1990 after negotiations to salvage it with amendments failed. Bush feared that racial quotas would be imposed. He said he was concerned that the bill would "introduce the destructive force of quotas into our nation's employment system." He added, "I deeply regret having to take this action, but when our efforts, however well intentioned, result in quotas, equal opportunity is not advanced but thwarted." Bush argued that the bill's standards were so tough to meet that quotas would be the only way a company could avoid lawsuits.
Supporters of the bill were upset with the decision. Arthur A. Fletcher, Bush's appointee as head of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, said that the bill was repeatedly watered down to meet Bush's objections. Senator Ted Kennedy, one of those leading the fight for passage of the bill, called the veto "tragic and disgraceful" and added, "when the chips are down, the White House is against civil rights." An attempt to over-ride the veto failed on October 24, 1990.
A year later, in 1991, Congress passed a watered down version of the bill, known as the Civil Rights Act of 1991. This bill providing the right to trial by jury on discrimination claims and introducing the possibility of emotional distress damages, while limiting the amount that a jury could award. President Bush signed this bill into law.