United Steelworkers v. Weber

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=United Steelworkers v. Weber
ArgueDate=March 28
ArgueYear=1979
DecideDate=June 27
DecideYear=1979
FullName=United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC v. Weber et al.
Citation=93 S. Ct. 705; 35 L. Ed. 2d 147; 1973 U.S. LEXIS 159
USVol=443
USPage=193
Holding= The Supreme Court held that United Steelworkers of America did not violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [http://finduslaw.com/civil_rights_act_of_1964_cra_title_vii_equal_employment_opportunities_42_us_code_chapter_21 Civil Rights Act of 1964] ] , as their affirmative action plan attempted to help minority workers and did not prevent other employees from advancing.
SCOTUS=1975-1981
Majority=Brennan
JoinMajority=Stewart, White, Marshall, Blackmun
Concurrence=Blackmun
Dissent=Burger
Dissent2=Rehnquist
JoinDissent2=Burger
LawsApplied=

"United Steelworkers of America v. Weber", 443 U.S. 193 (1979), was a case regarding affirmative action in which the United States Supreme Court held that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not bar employers from favoring women and minorities. The Court's decision reversed lower courts' rulings in favor of Brian Weber whose lawsuit beginning in 1974 challenged his employer's hiring practices.

Background

Brian Weber, a 32 year old laboratory analyst at a chemical plant, was excluded from a job training program that, if completed, would have significantly raised his pay. In an effort to raise the number of black workers in their company, the Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp., the company that Weber worked for, decided to accept whites and blacks into the training program on a 1 to 1 basis. Upon being rejected from the program, Weber filed a lawsuit, citing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as the basis for it.

The Case

Lower and federal courts supported Weber's claim that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned all forms of racial discrimination in employment whether against blacks or whites. But a 5-2 Supreme Court majority disagreed, arguing that the lower courts' rulings were consistent with the text of the act but not the intent of Congress. Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justice William Rehnquist dissented. Chief Justice Warren Burger said, "Congress expressly prohibited the discrimination against Brian Weber the court approves now." (Lewis Powell and John Paul Stevens did not participate in the decision.)

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 443

References

* [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,920466,00.html "What the Weber Ruling Does"] . "Time". July 9, 1979.
* [http://www.answers.com/topic/united-steelworkers-of-america-v-weber "United Steelworkers v. Weber."] "West's Encyclopedia of American Law." The Gale Group, Inc. 1998.

External links

* [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=443&invol=193 Text of the decision] at findlaw.com. Accessed Jan. 29, 2007.
*Herndon, Randolph K. [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0012-7086%28198012%292%3A1980%3A6%3C1172%3ATPOSAI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23 "The Presence of State Action in United Steelworkers v. Weber."] "Duke Law Journal". Vol. 1980, No. 6. (Dec., 1980), pp. 1172-1200. Accessed Jan. 29, 2007.
* [http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1978/1978_78_432/ Oyez: United Steelworkers of America v. Weber] Accessed Nov. 3, 2007.