The jurisprudence of race and meritocracy: Standardized testing and "race-neutral" racism in the workplace.

Abstract

This article examines the jurisprudential interrelationships between the concept of "merit," the tradition of legal individualism, and various doctrines of employment discrimination law. Specifically, we review evidence of continuing racial disparities in income and employment that have persisted despite decades of litigation to reduce or eliminate them. We argue that the unique jurisprudential role played by the concept of merit has undermined legal attempts to address the structural causes of racial discrimination in the workplace. We further suggest that the use of standardized employment tests and the nature of the legal doctrines that govern their use reflect certain outmoded meritocratic assumptions that, by individualizing the nature of racial disparity, contribute to continuing group disadvantage in the workplace.

Mapping the Racial Bias of the White Male Capital Juror: Jury Composition and the “Empathic Divide”

“…Yet the methods by which these inequalities are preserved have changed shape over time, making them difficult to identify and even harder to rectify. Thus, racial hierarchies and inequalities, which give rise to prejudice and discrimination, are operated in seemingly even-handed, ''neutral'' ways (e.g., Haney & Hurtado 1994) and are produced and reproduced at a systemic level that makes them appear ''natural'' and the explicit ''fault'' of no particular individual (see also Massey 2007;Haney López 2000;Wacquant 2000).…”

Reactions to Affirmative Action: Substance and Semantics

“…For those who subscribe to the notion that ours is a meritocracy, the concept of affirmative action may appear irrelevant at best, and at worst like a form of reverse discrimination (Carter, 1991;Sowell, 1990;Steele, 1991). Among those who feel that the realities of life diverge dramatically from the meritocratic ideal, on the other hand, affirmative action may appear to be the only sure way to advance toward equity of opportunity (Crosby, 1997;Haney & Hurtado, 1994). In short, it is probable that some citizens oppose affirmative action not because of prejudice nor because the policy would weaken the advantage of their reference group, but because they genuinely perceive affirmative action to be unfair.…”

Legitimacy, Social Identity, and the Mobilization of Law: The Effects of Assembly Bill 540 on Undocumented Students in California

“…5 5 Meritocracy is also powerfully entrenched in the U.S. legal system, where it informs legal decisions that block the progress of some rights‐granting laws (Beiner 2002; Haney and Hurtado 1994). …”