The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled on several significant issues that were left undecided in its April 20, 2007 opinion. The court determined that the settlement agreement between the United States and New York City over discriminatory hiring practices for custodial employees intended to distinguish between two types of offerees, those who alleged discrimination in the city’s application test and those who alleged discrimination in its recruiting policies.
Earlier the court found that the evidence was sufficient to justify a race-conscious remedy only for testing claim beneficiaries and not for recruiting claim beneficiaries. Because the court found the original agreement intended to distinguish between testing claim beneficiaries and recruiting claim beneficiaries it did not need to revisit its earlier determinations. The court also determined that some of the offerees were not actual victims of discrimination.