Firefighter Ricci protected from discrimination; “that totally misses the point” says group organizing smear campaign

“Mr. Ricci … can’t have it both ways; these laws can’t be good when you use them to protect yourself and bad when they’re used to protect someone else.” – People For the American Way Executive Vice President Marge Baker

Ms. Baker and People for the American Way, an organization that states in its mission statement that it is “dedicated to … a vibrantly diverse democratic society in which everyone is treated equally under the law, [and] given the freedom and opportunity to pursue their dreams…” have decided to villify a law-abiding, hard-working firefighter, whose only offense is to want to be treated fairly. Mr. Ricci worked hard to pursue his dreams, asked only to be “treated equally under the law”, and is now being attacked by a “progressive” group that is happy to tear him down in order to support the nomination of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. They have also decided to investigate and publicize what they describe as “Frank Ricci’s troubled and litigious work history.” Disgraceful.

The introductory quote refers to the lead plaintiff in Ricci vs. DeStafano, a lawsuit recently decided by the Supreme Court in Mr. Ricci’s favor. It stems from a group of eighteen firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut that passed a test for promotions to management. City of New Haven officials subsequently invalidated the test because none of the African-American firefighters passed the exam. After working its way through the courts, the Supreme Court heard the case on April 22, 2009 and issued its ruling on June 29, 2009, deciding that New Haven’s decision to ignore the test results violated provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ms. Baker is apparently confused by what she sees as inappropriateness in Mr. Ricci’s past protection by the Americans with Disabilities Act which prevented the City of New Haven from denying his employment as a firefighter based upon his learning disability (dyslexia). The Supreme Court has clarified and affirmed the constitutionality of the ADA on numerous occasions, so it is settled law and should be applied where necessary.

Let’s get it straight – the highest court in the land affirmed that Mr. Ricci was correct in his belief he was discriminated against. In addition, application of a different, existing statute prevented Mr. Ricci from being discriminated against in the past. Ms. Baker made the above statement well after the Supreme Court rendered its Ricci vs. DeStafano decision, so her words are irrelevant, uninformed, mean-spirited, dismissive – and despicable.

During the process of vying for a promotion, Mr. Ricci did not ask for special accommodations to assist him in studying for the management test. To the contrary, he paid $1000 to have the textbooks read onto audio tapes, to compensate for his reading disability. In addition, he took practice tests, made flash cards, and studied with others. He was provided with an opportunity, of which he made the most – and passed the test. His victory was then taken away from him – he was treated unfairly, he decided he would not let it stand, and he was proven correct. To create a campaign to denigrate a public servant – a first responder at that – because of his demand to be given a fair shake is beyond the pale.

Mr. Ricci, congratulations on your successes – for your passing grade on the promotions test and your successful case before the Supreme Court. Ms. Baker, we say “Shame on you” and:

“Oh no you didn’t say that!”