Lawyers' Committee Files Amicus Briefs with Supreme Court and Court of Appeals in Support of Private Right of Action to Enforce Disparate Impact Regulations

In December 2000, the Lawyers' Committee and the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, Inc. filed an Amicus Brief with the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Alexander v. Sandoval. Our brief focused on whether the regulations, which include a disparate impact standard rather than an intent standard, are a valid interpretation of Congress' intent. We argued that, despite the more stringent standard required under the statute, Congress intended Federal agencies to promulgate regulations appropriate with their programs and activities. As promulgated, the regulations validly interpreted Congress' intent, as demonstrated by legislative history, judicial precedent, and subsequent civil rights legislation, by including a disparate impact standard.

Despite decades of judicial decisions and Congressional actions demonstrating the prevailing consensus that a private right of action exists to enforce disparate impact regulations under § 602 of Title VI, the Supreme Court issued its decision denying that right on April 24, 2001. Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001). The Court's decision undercut the settled expectations of nearly every Court of Appeals, which have either explicitly or implicitly held that the right exists. This was a major set back for civil rights and environmental justice communities, potentially requiring communities suffering from disproportionate environmental harms to prove discriminatory intent - a much higher burden of proof.

Immediately following the Sandoval decision, a Federal district court ruled that Title VI disparate impact regulations can be enforced under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, despite the Supreme Court's decision precluding enforcement directly under § 602 of Title VI. South Camden Citizens in Action v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 145 F.Supp.2d 505 (D.N.J. May 10, 2001). The Lawyers' Committee along with NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, Inc., National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Asian American Legal Defense & Education Fund, and Garden State Bar Association filed an amicus brief with the Third Circuit regarding the disparate impact of permitting a polluting facility in Camden, New Jersey.

Our brief argued that well-settled civil rights precedent supported the lower court's analysis and decision of a Title VI violation in the environmental justice context. In addition, we sought to preserve the district court's ruling that Sandoval did not preclude plaintiffs from pursuing their claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because it provided an avenue of civil rights enforcement that would limit the fallout of Sandoval and preserve Title VI as a vital tool for challenging discriminatory environmental decision making.

Yet, this enforcement avenue was precluded in the Third Circuit on December 17, 2001, when the Third Circuit ruled that § 1983 did not provide plaintiffs with an enforceable right to enforce Title VI disparate impact regulations. South Camden Citizens in Action v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 2001 WL 1602144, Nos. 01-2224, 01-2296 (3d Cir. Dec. 17, 2001). Title VI disparate impact regulations, according to the Third Circuit, do not create a right that is enforceable under § 1983 because the statute authorizing the regulations do not. Title VI creates a right to be free from intentional discrimination, not disparate impact discrimination. Therefore, the Circuit held that plaintiffs cannot use § 1983 to enforce a right that goes beyond what the statute creates. This ruling was another major set back for civil rights and environmental justice as it further burdens certain communities suffering from disproportionate environmental harms with a more stringent evidentiary standard to prove a Title VI violation.

Brief of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, National Health Law Program, Center for Constitutional Rights, Center for Law in the Public Interest as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents

Brief of Amici Curiae Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund and Garden State Bar Association in Support of Appellee and Urging Affirmance

back to the top

Environmental Justice Project