“Although it was urged that ... ‘goals’ should be treated differently than obligatory set asides ... we do not think it matters whether a government hiring program imposes hard quotas, soft quotas, or goals. Any one of these techniques induces an employer to hire with an eye toward meeting the numerical target. As such, they can and surely will result in individuals being granted a privilege because of their race.”
How later courts described this case
- “Although it was urged that ... ‘goals’ should be treated differently than obligatory set asides ... we do not think it matters whether a government hiring program imposes hard quotas, soft quotas, or goals. Any one of these techniques induces an employer to hire with an eye toward meeting the numerical target. As such, they can and surely will result in individuals being granted a privilege because of their race.”
- denial of petition for rehearing
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
A statement by Chief Judge HARRY T. EDWARDS, with whom WALD, Circuit Judge, concurs, dissenting from the denial of the suggestions of rehearing en bane is attached.
A statement filed by Circuit Judge TATEL, with whom WALD, Circuit Judge, concurs, dissenting from the denial of the suggestions of rehearing en banc is also attached.
*495 Circuit Judge ROGERS would grant the suggestions of rehearing en banc.
Circuit Judge GARLAND did not participate in this matter.
ON SUGGESTIONS OF REHEARING EN BANC
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Respondent’s and Intervenor’s Suggestions of Rehearing En Banc and the response thereto have been circulated to the full court. The taking of a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges of the court in regular active service did not vote in favor of the suggestions. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is
Ordered that the suggestions be denied.