The
concept of disparate impact (unequal or incongruent effect) is the idea that
some rules and regulations agreed upon by local government agencies cause undue
harm and personal intrusion to various ethnic, economic, and religious groups.
In
order to undo these intrusions, the Feds use the judicial organization to
declare these rules (unacceptable to the Federal government) unconstitutional
under the Fourteenth Amendment (the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution) because of the disparate impact the rules have on the target
ethnic or religious group.
Examples of use of the disparate impact
concept include the laws passed by states for voter identification, various
zoning laws, employment, and housing regulations. The Feds often claim that
regulations in these areas discriminate unfairly and disproportionately against
persons or groups in certain protected classes. These classes of people include
people with characteristics of race, color, religion, national origin, gender,
disability, and other traits, as well.
All this disparate impact policy seems good and fair;
but…the concept is being greatly overused. Of course, we must all remember that
part of the function of the Supreme Court and the lesser courts of the land is
to see that minority groups do not suffer the loss of their legitimate civil
rights at the hands of an uncaring, selfish, and inconsiderate, majority.
Nevertheless, I feel that MY rights and privileges are being disparately
impacted by a “politically correct” judicial system that is seeing the concept
of disparate impact as a tool to advance the pet schemes of a far-left,
liberal, group of elite power managers and people-planners. I think that the
principle of majority rule in our supposedly democratic society should have some impact of its own.
One example of a place where I strongly believe the idea
of “disparate impact” has been abused is in the situation involving voter
identification laws. I believe that photo-ID and other measures to ensure voter
identification works no “disparate impact” on anyone. All legitimate voters in
the United States can obtain state-issued ID cards without any difficulty. To
declare that minority people cannot obtain ID cards easily is not true. I
strongly suspect that those who would oppose voter ID laws are those who would
like to have many Latino votes, even if those votes were cast by ineligible
voters.
Another area where the idea of “disparate impact” has
been abused is in the situation of same-sex marriage. If same-sex people want
to live together, then, they can do so. But, to denigrate the time-tested
institution of marriage because of the wishes of a very small minority of
Americans is just foolish and extremely unfair to a large majority of us who
revere marriage as the cornerstone of a healthy society.
Posts
