Backward Steps for Civil Rights

By Loretta Feller

Recent changes in Congress and the courts are making it increasingly difficult to prove discrimination in civil rights lawsuits. Generally, lawyers for women and minority groups prefer to show discrimination by focusing on its effects (such as women and Hispanics failing a 6-foot height requirement for an accountant position), rather than the intent (as when the foreman says, "We never hire broads around here") of a given practice. (They often rely upon statistical methods to help demonstrate the discriminatory effect.)

In a recent case, Texas Department of Community

Affairs v. Burdine, the Supreme Court denounced the standard of "effect" and the use of statistics in favor of the more rigorous standard of "intent". In doing so, says Ann Aldrich, Federal District Court Judge from Cleveland, the burden of proof is placed back on the plaintiff. The employer may raise the defense of "business necessity" as before, but now would not have to show a connection between that business necessity and the decision adversely affecting the plaintiff. In an article on "intent," the April 19, 1981 New York Times quotes Owen Fiss, a Yale law professor, as saying that the intent test represents "an attempt to individualize or personalize an evil or wrong that is basically an institutional wrong," and

R2N2 Seeks to Block Human Life Statute

By Deborah Van Kleef

Blocking the passage of a Human Life Amendment and the Human Life Statute (Senate Bill 158) must be the highest priority for reproductive rights activists. This was the consensus among 300 women who attended the Reproductive Rights National Network (R2N2) Semiannual National Conference in New York City on March 27-29. Seven members of the Cleveland Pro-Choice Action Committee participated in the conference, along with women from Oberlin, Kent, Columbus and Cincinnati.

R2N2 was formed in February, 1979, by 23 groups, and has grown to include over 50, from every region of the continental United States. Among the affiliated groups are abortion rights committees, coalitions to fight sterilization abuse, health care providers, political organizations and women's rights groups. Members of these organizations are working class, middle class, Third World; gay, straight.

The Network's members are diverse, but agree on the following principles of unity:

-We believe that women have a right to control our bodies, and that we must organize to secure that right.

-We support the right and access of all women to abortion; we oppose all forms of sterilization abuse; we demand access to effective, safe birth control and sex education; we support each person's right to determine her/his own personal and sexual relations.

-We recognize that reproductive freedom cannot be achieved if women are forced to be undereducated, underor unemployed, poor, sick, or victims of racism. Therefore we demand equal opportunity and equal wages for all women, decent housing and health care, quality childcare, a home free from violence, and a safe workplace.

The purpose of the conference was not to hammer out a strict program, but to set priorities, discuss strategies and share experiences and information. The format included panels and workshops for discussion of issues, proposals of strategy and tactics, and small group discussions to consider those proposals.

Topics of panel discussions included Population Control v. Birth Control, The New Right: Implications for Abortion Rights Strategies, The Media as a Strategic Tool, and Health Care and Reproductive Rights.

&

Workshops covered press work, public speaking, sexual harassment in the workplace, workplace organizing, childcare, organizing rural women, custody and reproductive rights, lesbian perspectives on abortion, Sterilization Abuse Educational Tour (being organized by R2N2 and Women of All Red Nations), and self help.

Several major concerns threaded through formal presentations and large and small group discussions.

These are concerns which have arisen in response to the frightening changes occurring in the political climate of the United States:

-R2N2 groups, which tend to make up the left wing of the abortion rights movement, are feeling an increased need to work in coalitions. This includes both reproductive rights coalitions and coalitions around other issues, such as nuclear power and weapons and budget priorities. Network members agreed to participate as a visible presence at the May 3 march on the Pentagon.

-Although R2N2 groups have tended to concentrate on direct action and education, leaving lobbying and legislative efforts to NARAL affiliates and others, conference participants agreed that it is appropriate and essential for us to adopt those kinds of tactics in fighting S.158 and the Human Life Amendment.

-Finally, several speakers expressed the need for us to find new ways of talking about the abortion issue. As both Rhonda Copelon of the Center for

Constitutional Rights and Roz Peteshky of the Commíttee for Abortion Rights and Against Sterilization Abuse (CARASA) pointed out, the Right now controls the terms of the debate. They have lifted abortion out of its original context, as one small part of a total vision of an equitable society, and made it the central symbol (with not just symbolic implications) in the battle over women's rights. Peteshky em(continued on page 10)

NATIONAL NEWS

for that reason it was "misguided". For example, he said, "All the evils that can be attributed to school segregation exist independently of whether or not the superintendent or school board members intended them".

To prove intent, it would be necessary to obtain an admission from some relevant official of the company that discrimination had been a factor in the company's decision affecting the plaintiff. Another way to prove intent would be to collect motivational evidence such as the use of racial epithets or expressions of stereotyped generalities about the plaintiff's class (i.e., race, sex, national origin, religion). One would have found it easier to obtain such admissions in the earliest days of civil rights legislation, but not today. In re-emphasizing intent, the Court appears to be taking several steps backward to the earliest theory of proof in civil rights cases.

Since the 1971 Griggs v. Duke Power Co. decision by the Supreme Court, courts have been using statistics and "effect" to demonstrate discrimination. In that case, general intelligence tests and other criteria for employment that disproportionately excluded minorities were invalidated when they did not, in fact, fairly measure or predict actual performance on the job. By using statistical data, Griggs recognized the existence of a pervasive, interlocking process of discrimination in education, employment, and other areas ("Affirmative Action in the 1980's: Dismantling the Process of Discrimination," U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, January 1981). For example, the high school diploma requirement for a "coal handler" job was invalidated because it was unrelated to the job and operated to exclude minorities as a result of past discrimination in education. In such a context, "neutrality" (the presence of good intent or the absence of bad) only supported existing unequal conditions when there was no relationship to the tasks to be performed.

Senator Orrin Hatch, a conservative Republican, and at least five other Republican Senators including Strom Thurmond of South Carolina have denounced the standard of "effect" and favor proof of "intent". As Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Hatch has announced that Senate hearings on affirmative action are scheduled to begin May 4. The hearings will include an overview of affirmative action, its impact on minority groups, economic costs and the impact on the legal system and on educational institutions. Hatch is the author of a constitutional amendment, the "Equal Protection" Amendment, aimed at limiting affirmative action programs by referring to them as "quota programs" which give preferential treatment to women and minorities.

The issue of intent will also be discussed in May when Congress begins debates on the extension of the Voting Rights Act and fair housing legislation.

Mother's Day March on Washington

By Suzanne Watson

On Mother's Day, May 10, and Monday, May 11, women from all over the country will meet and march in Washington, D.C. to call for an immediate halt to the nuclear arms race in both the United States and the Soviet Union.

1

The Mother's Day Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament is composed of members of the Women's Party for Survival (primarily an East Coast group) and individuals from various disarmament and women's groups. We have chosen Mother's Day as an ap-

堂

propriate time to join together to call a halt to the arms race. We want our children to survive!

This will be a peaceful, legal action. Many of us plan to march with our families. All who are concerned are urged to join. In Cleveland we are hoping to be able to charter a bus if there are enough persons interested. Round trip cost will be approximately $25.00, leaving Saturday night and returning Sunday night. Please call 241-7859 for more information on the bus to D.C. and events of the day.

The horror of a nuclear holocaust is universally acknowledged. Join the struggle to save humanity. Act-don't mourn!

May, 1981/What She Wants/Page'3

&

1 A