We pointed you to the hiring scandal at DOJ; now here come the "viewpoint discrimination" lawsuits. The first doesn't look that strong to me, but remember that records statutes like the Privacy Act can often be the hook keeping litigation from being adjudged frivolous. I don't remember reading the plaintiff's name in conjunction with any of this stuff. But if it was disclosed to someone, he might have a case - regardless of whether he would have got the job or not (and proving that viewpoint discrimination as opposed to GPA, other deserving candidates, actually was the cause of the plaintiff not being hired by DOJ in these sorts of suits is going to be extremely difficult - I wouldn't hold my breath for an Equal Protection clause victory for that among many, many other reasons).
| Bookmark
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/38673/30782628
Links to weblogs that reference The DOJ Hiring Scandal - the Litigation:
1. Posted by Jake on July 1, 2008 @ 21:44 | Permalink
What "hiring scandal at DOJ"? The agency has been populated for years about 9-to-1 in favor of liberals (or progressives, or whatever term suits your fancy). Is it not fair to say that hiring practices, quota based or otherwise, that serve to remediate such historical discrimination are permissible? Any hiring decisions that supposedly favored conservative candidates are no more offensive under the law than the practices of the U of Michigan law school, not long ago blessed by our very own Supreme Court.
Bah.
- fedgovernor on The Oil Mark
- churgyNuh on GM-Ford Merg
- Stapellufable on Junior Schol
- dissertation on Weight of Hi
- Jake on The Oil Mark
- Cathy on The Oil Mark
- laborprof lpb on Bailout, Uni
- fedgovernor on The Oil Mark
- Brandon P. on BYU v. Utah
- David on What makes a
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
