Austin Black Contractors Ass'n v. City of Austin, Tex., 94-50729
| Decision Date | 21 March 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 94-50729,94-50729 |
| Citation | 78 F.3d 185 |
| Parties | AUSTIN BLACK CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Eric E. Vickers, Vickers & Assoc., University City, MO, for appellant.
Rex D. VanMiddlesworth, Mayor, Day, Caldwell & Keeton, Austin, TX, Richard Keeton, Frederick D. Junkin, Mayor, Day, Caldwell & Keeton, Houston, TX, for appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.
Before WISDOM, GARWOOD, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
Plaintiff-appellant, the Austin Black Contractors Association ("ABCA"), brought this action against the defendant-appellee, the city of Austin, Texas ("City"), alleging racial discrimination in the awarding of the city's construction contracts. The ABCA bases its complaint on the results of a historical study commissioned by the City that indicates minorities have been statistically "under-utilized" on City construction projects.
The ABCA's complaint is brief, alleging that the City has historically excluded African Americans and other minorities from participation in construction projects because of their race, and that the City continues to do so. It does not allege any specific instance of recent or ongoing discrimination, but states that "the findings of the study and the defendant's exclusion of African American businesses from contracts on the airport and other City projects indicates a continuing pattern, practice and custom on the part of the City to deny African American businesses, including plaintiff's members, the right to enter into contracts with the City because of their race." The ABCA requests relief in the form of requiring the City to impose a ten percent construction spending set-aside for African American contractors, and to create a twenty million dollar trust to aid in financing and bond assistance for African Americans.
The City moved to dismiss the ABCA's complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a cause of action upon which relief could be granted. After a hearing, the district court dismissed the case, concluding that the ABCA does not have "a constitutional cause of action against the City for failure to implement an affirmative action program." To the extent that the ABCA's complaint alleges such a cause of action, we agree with this ruling.
The ABCA bases its argument that a City is required to adopt aggressive affirmative action programs on the United States Supreme Court decision in City of Richmond v. Croson. 1 This reading of Croson is in error. In Croson, the Supreme Court held that evidence of statistical disparities between the availability and utilization of minority contractors in a city, combined with other evidence of racial discrimination in that industry, may justify the voluntary adoption of a race-based affirmative action program. 2 The Croson court did not indicate that such programs may be constitutionally mandated. This court will not now extend Croson to create such a requirement. In making this ruling, we join the numerous other circuits that have previously determined that the Fourteenth Amendment does not require affirmative action. 3
Because the ABCA has failed to plead a statutory or constitutional basis for its claim of inadequate affirmative action, we AFFIRM the dismissal of that portion of the plaintiff's complaint.
It appears, however, that the district court incorrectly construed the ABCA's complaint as alleging only a cause of action for the City's failure to adopt specific affirmative action programs, and therefore failed to address the ABCA's claim of ongoing racial discrimination before dismissing the ABCA's complaint. Although the ABCA's complaint is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Star Tobacco Inc. v. Darilek
...accord General Star Indem. Co. v. Vesta Fire Ins. Corp., 173 F.3d 946, 950 (5th Cir.1999); Austin Black Contractors Ass'n v. City of Austin, Tex., 78 F.3d 185, 187 (5th Cir.1996). In Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit, 507 U.S. 163, 168, 113 S.Ct. 1160......
-
Race Discrimination
...in reverse discrimination to make up for past racial discrimination. Id. at 239. In Austin Black Contractors Ass’n v. City of Austin , 78 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 1996), the plaintiffs sought to compel the City to set aside ten-percent of its construction spending for contracts to African-America......
-
Race Discrimination
...in reverse discrimination to make up for past racial discrimination. Id. at 239. In Austin Black Contractors Ass’n v. City of Austin , 78 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 1996), the plaintiffs sought to compel the City to set aside ten-percent of its construction spending for contracts to African-America......
-
Table of cases
...Parish Sch. Bd. , 249 F.3d 400 (5th Cir. 2001), §§18:7.H.1.a, 24:3.A.1, 41:5.C.1.c Austin Black Contractors Ass’n v. City of Austin , 78 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 1996), §22:6.C.4 Austin & N.W.R. Co. v. Cluck , 97 Tex. 172 (Tex. 1903), §28:2.A.2 Austin State Hosp. v. Kitchen , 903 S.W.2d 83 (Tex. ......
-
Race discrimination
...in reverse discrimination to make up for past racial discrimination. Id. at 239. In Austin Black Contractors Ass’n v. City of Austin , 78 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 1996), the plaintiffs sought to compel the City to set aside ten-percent of its construction spending for contracts to African-America......