Also known as:disparate impact analyses · disparate-impact analysis · disparate impact · adverse impact analysis
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A method of establishing unlawful discrimination through evidence that a facially neutral rule or practice disproportionately burdens members of a protected class. The analysis focuses on statistical outcomes rather than explicit classifications or stated motives. Under equal protection doctrine the method alone does not prove a constitutional violation without additional proof of discriminatory purpose.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Veterans Preference Disproportionately Affects Women
Delilah Duran applied for a state civil-service position but lost to a less-qualified male veteran under a statute giving absolute hiring preference to veterans. The preference produced markedly lower success rates for female applicants overall. Duran sued claiming the statute violated equal protection because of its gender-disparate results. The court rejected the claim because the legislature had adopted the preference to reward military service rather than to disadvantage women.
Termination Policy Challenged Under Title VII
Dustin Donovan, a gay employee at Decker Electronics, was fired after his supervisor learned of his sexual orientation. Donovan introduced company data showing that policies on "conduct unbecoming" produced far higher termination rates for gay men than for straight employees. He argued the facially neutral rule created a disparate impact on the basis of sex. The court considered whether impact evidence could support liability under Title VII even without proof that the employer intended to target gay workers.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Hornbooks
Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia140 S. Ct. 1731, 1739 (2020)
Discarded Promotion Test Sparks Reverse-Discrimination Suit
David Dawson and other white firefighters at Delta Dynamics scored highest on a promotion exam the city later discarded because minority pass rates were substantially lower. The city refused to certify the results and promoted no one. Dawson sued alleging the city's refusal violated Title VII by using race-based disparate-impact concerns to disadvantage higher-scoring white candidates. The court ruled that the city could not discard the results absent a strong basis in evidence that it would otherwise face disparate-impact liability.
Ricci v. DeStefano557 U.S. 557 (2009)
Class Certification Denied for Lack of Common Proof
Denise Donovan and thousands of other female employees at Dominion Capital sought to certify a nationwide class alleging that the company's subjective promotion practices produced a disparate impact on women. The plaintiffs offered only statistical evidence of gender disparities in management positions. The court denied certification because the women could not show that the same employment practice affected every class member in a common way.
Derek Douglas, a male state employee, challenged a state family-leave statute that provided twelve weeks of leave only to mothers after childbirth. Statistical evidence showed the policy produced a disparate impact on fathers seeking comparable leave. The court upheld the statute because Congress had enacted it to remedy documented discrimination against women in the workplace rather than to discriminate against men.
Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs538 U.S. 721 (2003)
Age-Based Pay Scale Produces Disparate Impact
Destiny Davis and other older police officers in the City of Jackson sued after a new pay plan granted larger raises to officers with fewer than five years of service. The plan produced statistically lower compensation increases for officers over age forty. The officers offered only impact evidence and no proof of intent to harm older workers. The court held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act permits disparate-impact claims but requires plaintiffs to identify the specific practice causing the disparity and to prove it was not based on reasonable factors other than age.
Smith v. City of Jackson, Miss.544 U.S. 228 (2005)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
2
Does statistical evidence of disparate impact alone prove an equal-protection violation?+
No. Under equal protection doctrine a facially neutral policy that produces a disparate impact on a protected class does not violate the Constitution unless the plaintiff also proves that the policy was adopted for the purpose of discriminating against that class.
Supporting sources
What must a plaintiff show to prevail on a disparate-impact claim under the ADEA?+
The plaintiff must identify the specific employment practice causing the disparity and demonstrate that the employer cannot justify the practice as based on reasonable factors other than age.
188 F.3d 394 (6th Cir. 1999)Civil Procedure
…their argument that the University is unlikely to present evidence of past discrimination by the University itself or of the disparate impact of some current admissions criteria, and that these may be important and relevant factors in determining the legality of a race-conscious admissions policy. We must therefore conclude that…