City of Richmond v. Croson Company

Decision Date23 January 1989
Docket NumberNo. 87-998,87-998
Citation488 U.S. 469,102 L.Ed.2d 854,109 S.Ct. 706
PartiesCITY OF RICHMOND, Appellant v. J.A. CROSON COMPANY
CourtU.S. Supreme Court
Syllabus

Appellant city adopted a Minority Business Utilization Plan (Plan) requiring prime contractors awarded city construction contracts to subcontract at least 30% of the dollar amount of each contract to one or more "Minority Business Enterprises" (MBE's), which the Plan defined to include a business from anywhere in the country at least 51% of which is owned and controlled by black, Spanish-speaking, Oriental, Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut citizens. Although the Plan declared that it was "remedial" in nature, it was adopted after a public hearing at which no direct evidence was presented that the city had discriminated on the basis of race in letting contracts or that its prime contractors had discriminated against minority subcontractors. The evidence that was introduced included: a statistical study indicating that, although the city's population was 50% black, only 0.67% of its prime construction contracts had been awarded to minority businesses in recent years; figures establishing that a variety of local contractors' associations had virtually no MBE members; the city's counsel's conclusion that the Plan was constitutional under Fullilove v. Klutznick, 448 U.S. 448, 100 S.Ct. 2758, 65 L.Ed.2d 902, and the statements of Plan proponents indicating that there had been widespread racial discrimination in the local, state, and national construction industries. Pursuant to the Plan, the city adopted rules requiring individualized consideration of each bid or request for a waiver of the 30% set-aside, and providing that a waiver could be granted only upon proof that sufficient qualified MBE's were unavailable or unwilling to participate. After appellee construction company, the sole bidder on a city contract, was denied a waiver and lost its contract, it brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the Plan was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The Federal District Court upheld the Plan in all respects, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, applying a test derived from the principal opinion in Fullilove, supra, which accorded great deference to Congress' findings of past societal discrimination in holding that a 10% minority set-aside for certain federal construction grants did not violate the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment. However, on appellee's petition for certiorari in this case, this Court vacated and remanded for further consideration in light of its intervening decision in Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education, 476 U.S. 267, 106 S.Ct. 1842, 90 L.Ed.2d 260, in which the plurality applied a strict scrutiny standard in holding that a race-based layoff program agreed to by a school board and the local teachers' union violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. On remand, the Court of Appeals held that the city's Plan violated both prongs of strict scrutiny, in that (1) the Plan was not justified by a compelling governmental interest, since the record revealed no prior discrimination by the city itself in awarding contracts, and (2) the 30% set-aside was not narrowly tailored to accomplish a remedial purpose.

Held: The judgment is affirmed.

822 F.2d 1355 (CA4 1987), affirmed.

Justice O'CONNOR delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, III-B, and IV, concluding that:

1. The city has failed to demonstrate a compelling governmental interest justifying the Plan, since the factual predicate supporting the Plan does not establish the type of identified past discrimination in the city's construction industry that would authorize race-based relief under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Pp. 498-506.

(a) A generalized assertion that there has been past discrimination in the entire construction industry cannot justify the use of an unyielding racial quota, since it provides no guidance for the city's legislative body to determine the precise scope of the injury it seeks to remedy and would allow race-based decisionmaking essentially limitless in scope and duration. The city's argument that it is attempting to remedy various forms of past societal discrimination that are alleged to be responsible for the small number of minority entrepreneurs in the local contracting industry fails, since the city also lists a host of nonracial factors which would seem to face a member of any racial group seeking to establish a new business enterprise, such as deficiencies in working capital, inability to meet bonding requirements, unfamiliarity with bidding procedures, and disability caused by an inadequate track record. Pp. 498-499.

(b) None of the "facts" cited by the city or relied on by the District Court, singly or together, provide a basis for a prima facie case of a constitutional or statutory violation by anyone in the city's construction industry. The fact that the Plan declares itself to be "remedial" is insufficient, since the mere recitation of a "benign" or legitimate purpose for a racial classification is entitled to little or no weight. Similarly, the views of Plan proponents as to past and present discrimination in the industry are highly conclusory and of little probative value. Reliance on the disparity between the number of prime contracts awarded to minority businesses and the city's minority population is also misplaced, since the proper statistical evaluation would compare the percentage of MBE's in the relevant market that are qualified to undertake city subcontracting work with the percentage of total city construction dollars that are presently awarded to minority subcontractors, neither of which is known to the city. The fact that MBE membership in local contractors' associations was extremely low is also not probative absent some link to the number of MBE's eligible for membership, since there are numerous explanations for the dearth of minority participation, including past societal discrimination in education and economic opportunities as well as both black and white career and entrepreneurial choices. Congress' finding in connection with the set-aside approved in Fullilove that there had been nationwide discrimination in the construction industry also has extremely limited probative value, since, by including a waiver procedure in the national program, Congress explicitly recognized that the scope of the problem would vary from market area to market area. In any event, Congress was acting pursuant to its unique enforcement powers under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 499-504.

(c) The "evidence" relied upon by Justice MARSHALL's dissent the city's history of school desegregation and numerous congressional reports—does little to define the scope of any injury to minority contractors in the city or the necessary remedy, and could justify a preference of any size or duration. Moreover, Justice MARSHALL's suggestion that discrimination findings may be "shared" from jurisdiction to jurisdiction is unprecedented and contrary to this Court's decisions. Pp. 504-506.

(d) Since there is absolutely no evidence of past discrimination against Spanish-speaking, Oriental, Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut persons in any aspect of the city's construction industry, the Plan's random inclusion of those groups strongly impugns the city's claim of remedial motivation. P. 506.

2. The Plan is not narrowly tailored to remedy the effects of prior discrimination, since it entitles a black, Hispanic, or Oriental entrepreneur from anywhere in the country to an absolute preference over other citizens based solely on their race. Although many of the barriers to minority participation in the construction industry relied upon by the city to justify the Plan appear to be race neutral, there is no evidence that the city considered using alternative, race-neutral means to increase minority participation in city contracting. Moreover, the Plan's rigid 30% quota rests upon the completely unrealistic assumption that minorities will choose to enter construction in lockstep proportion to their representation in the local population. Unlike the program upheld in Fullilove, the Plan's waiver system focuses upon the availability of MBE's, and does not inquire whether the particular MBE seeking a racial preference has suffered from the effects of past discrimination by the city or prime contractors. Given the fact that the city must already consider bids and waivers on a case-by-case basis, the city's only interest in maintaining a quota system rather than investigating the need for remedial action in particular cases would seem to be simply administrative convenience, which, standing alone, cannot justify the use of a suspect classification under equal protection strict scrutiny. Pp. 507-508.

Justice O'CONNOR, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and Justice WHITE, concluded in Part II that if the city could identify past discrimination in the local construction industry with the particularity required by the Equal Protection Clause, it would have the power to adopt race-based legislation designed to eradicate the effects of that discrimination. The principal opinion in Fullilove cannot be read to relieve the city of the necessity of making the specific findings of discrimination required by the Clause, since the congressional finding of past discrimination relied on in that case was made pursuant to Congress' unique power under § 5 of the Amendment to enforce, and therefore to identify and redress violations of, the Amendment's provisions. Conversely, § 1 of the Amendment, which includes the Equal Protection Clause, is an explicit constraint upon the power of States and political subdivisions, which must undertake any remedial efforts in accordance with the dictates of that section. However, the Court of Appeals erred to the extent that it followed by rote the Wygant plurality's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
789 cases
  • Vitolo v. Guzman
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee
    • May 19, 2021
    ...state and local governments are subject to strict scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment. See City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. , 488 U.S. 469, 493–94, 109 S.Ct. 706, 102 L.Ed.2d 854 (1989). In Croson , the Supreme Court reviewed a "Minority Business Utilization Plan" adopted by the Rich......
  • Harrison & Burrowes Bridge Constructors v. Cuomo
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York
    • August 2, 1990
    ...; Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education, 476 U.S. 267, 106 S.Ct. 1842, 90 L.Ed.2d 260 (1986) ; City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 109 S.Ct. 706, 102 L.Ed.2d 854 (1989). On this issue the Court has spoken as a majority only in certain portions of Justice O'Connor's opinion in......
  • Rice v. Cayetano
    • United States
    • Hawaii Supreme Court
    • September 6, 1996
    ...Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment establishes personal rights under this Amendment. City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 493, 109 S.Ct. 706, 721, 102 L.Ed.2d 854 (1989). A group classification such as one based on race is ordinarily subjected to detailed judicial s......
  • White v. State of Ala.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • October 6, 1994
    ...body is pursuing a goal important enough to warrant use of a highly suspect tool." City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 493, 109 S.Ct. 706, 721, 102 L.Ed.2d 854 (1989) (plurality opinion). It "also ensures that the means chosen `fit' this compelling goal so closely that there ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 firm's commentaries
142 books & journal articles
  • The Ideology of Supreme Court Opinions and Citations
    • United States
    • Iowa Law Review No. 97-3, March 2012
    • March 1, 2012
    ...State Club Ass’n v. City of New York, 487 U.S. 1 (1988) Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988) City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469 (1989) Skinner v. Ry. Labor Execs. Ass’n, 489 U.S. 602 (1989) Nat’l Treasury Emps. Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656 (1989) Wards Cove Packing Co......
  • The Ideology of Supreme Court Opinions and Citations
    • United States
    • Iowa Law Review No. 97-3, March 2012
    • March 1, 2012
    ...State Club Ass’n v. City of New York, 487 U.S. 1 (1988) Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988) City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469 (1989) Skinner v. Ry. Labor Execs. Ass’n, 489 U.S. 602 (1989) Nat’l Treasury Emps. Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656 (1989) Wards Cove Packing Co......
  • Splitting the Difference: A Bright-Line Proposal for the Ministerial Exception
    • United States
    • The Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy No. 20-1, January 2022
    • January 1, 2022
    ...process.”); Grutter , 539 U.S. at 326 (describing racial classif‌ications as a “highly suspect tool” (quoting Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 493 (1989))). 2022] A BRIGHT-LINE PROPOSAL FOR THE MINISTERIAL EXCEPTION 467 attitudes throughout society. 166 This is especially true for......
  • Race Discrimination
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 2 - 2016 Part V. Discrimination In Employment
    • July 27, 2016
    ...scrutiny, the classification must be narrowly tailored to meet a compelling state interest. See City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co ., 488 U.S. 469 (1989) (striking down City’s minority contracting plan because it failed to demonstrate a compelling state interest and was not narrowly tailore......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 provisions
  • PL 114, HB 1332 – Credit services; real estate transactions; securities; business enterprises
    • United States
    • Indiana Session Laws
    • January 1, 2010
    ...required under this section: (A) is based on goals for participation of minority business enterprises established in Richmond v. Croson, 488 U.S. 469 (1989); (B) includes information on both contracts and subcontracts (including, notwithstanding section 1(d) of this chapter or any other law......
  • PL 15, HB 1081 – Commission for supplier diversity
    • United States
    • Indiana Session Laws
    • January 1, 2020
    ...required under this section: (A) is based on goals for participation of minority business enterprises established in Richmond v. Croson, 488 U.S. 469 (1989); (B) includes information on both contracts and subcontracts (including, notwithstanding section 1(d) of this chapter or any other law......
  • Act 197, SB 197 – Minority and women businesses
    • United States
    • Indiana Session Laws
    • January 1, 2008
    ...required under this section: (A) is based on goals for participation of minority business enterprises established in Richmond v. Croson, 488 U.S. 469 (B) includes information on both contracts and subcontracts (including, notwithstanding section 1(d) of this chapter or any other law, contra......
  • Act 1566, HB 1566 – Minority and women's enterprises
    • United States
    • Indiana Session Laws
    • January 1, 2007
    ...required under this section: (A) is based on goals for participation of minority business enterprises established in Richmond v. Croson, 488 U.S. 469 (B) includes information on both contracts and subcontracts (including, notwithstanding section 1(d) of this chapter or any other law, contra......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT