Mackin v. City of Boston

USCA1 Opinion









July 20, 1992

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
_________________________


No. 91-2207


LAWRENCE MACKIN, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

CITY OF BOSTON, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees

_________________________


ERRATA SHEET
ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of the Court issued on July 6, 1992, is
corrected as follows:

On page 10, line 6, insert "no" between "by" and "means"









































July 6, 1992




_________________________

No. 91-2207

LAWRENCE MACKIN, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

CITY OF BOSTON, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
_________________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Walter Jay Skinner, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
_________________________

Before

Selya, Circuit Judge,
_____________
Coffin, Senior Circuit Judge,
____________________
and Fuste,* District Judge.
______________
_________________________

Michael D. Powers, with whom Nicholas Foundas was on brief,
_________________ ________________
for appellants.
Lisa J. Stark, Attorney, United States Dept. of Justice,
______________
with whom John R. Dunne, Assistant Attorney General, David O.
______________ ________
Simon, Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and David K.
_____ ________
Flynn, Attorney, United States Dept. of Justice, were on brief,
_____
for the federal appellee.
Albert W. Wallis, Corporation Counsel, and Stephen C. Pfaff,
________________ ________________
Assistant Corporation Counsel, on brief for the municipal
appellees.
Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General, and William W. Porter,
_________________ __________________
Assistant Attorney General, on brief for the state appellee.
Toni G. Wolfman, Richard M. Brunell, Foley, Hoag & Eliot,
________________ ___________________ ____________________
Alan Jay Rom, and Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law,
____________ _____________________________________________
on brief for appellee Boston Chapter, N.A.A.C.P., Inc.

_________________________


_________________________

_______________
*Of the District of Puerto Rico, sitting by designation.














SELYA, Circuit Judge. Thirty-five white male
SELYA, Circuit Judge.
_______________

applicants for positions in the Boston Fire Department (the

Department) filed suit in the district court on September 14,

1989. The plaintiffs alleged that a bevy of named defendants,

including the City of Boston, various municipal officials, and

the state personnel administrator, discriminated against them on

the basis of race both in constituting an eligibility list and in

making appointments to positions within the Department by means

of the list.1 The district court granted summary judgment for

the defendants. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND
I. BACKGROUND

The two original suits described in note 1, supra,
_____

resulted in the entry of the so-called Beecher decree. See
_______ ___

Boston Chapter, NAACP, Inc., v. Beecher, 371 F. Supp. 507, 520-23
___________________________ _______

(D. Mass.), aff'd, 504 F.2d 1017 (1st Cir. 1974), cert. denied,
_____ _____ ______

421 U.S. 910 (1975). Since 1974, the hiring of firefighters in

much of Massachusetts has been circumscribed by this decree.

Over time, the decree has been supplemented by several consent

decrees designed to implement administrative procedures for

offering examinations, establishing eligibility lists, releasing

____________________

1The United States joined the defendants in opposing
plaintiffs' requests for relief. The government's standing stems
from the district court's grant of its motion to consolidate
plaintiffs' suit with two suits filed in the early 1970s, one of
which was initiated by the United States, concerning the entry-
level exam then used by the state and various municipalities,
including Boston, to screen applicants for firefighters'
positions. In addition, the Boston Chapter of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
intervened as a defendant. It, too, opposed the plaintiffs'
requests.

3














municipalities from continuing judicial oversight, and the like.

We understand the plaintiffs to be challenging both the Beecher
_______

decree and the consent decrees entered to effectuate it. In

general, however, we will refer to the decree in the singular,

since it is the Beecher decree that is the cynosure of the
_______

parties' arguments.

Unlike some 30-odd other fire departments which

heretofore met the goals of the decree and gained release from

its constraints, the City of Boston remains under its aegis. In

1987, the state personnel administrator, acting on behalf of the

Department, conducted a written examination for the position of

firefighter. The personnel administrator then compiled an

eligibility list which gave preferential standing to blacks and

Spanish-surnamed individuals.2 Despite the fact that all 35

appellants earned perfect scores on the 1987 examination, they

were ranked below several minority candidates who earned lower

scores. As a result, appellants were disadvantaged with respect

to vacant firefighter positions.



____________________

2The eligibility list was assembled according to the
procedures specified in the decree. See Beecher, 371 F. Supp. at
___ _______
522-23. Briefly stated, those procedures stipulated that the
candidates placed on the list must have passed a properly
validated qualifying examination and otherwise have met all
eligibility requirements for the position. Beyond that point,
the list was to consist of one minority candidate (i.e., black or
Spanish-surnamed) for each white candidate. The decree
contemplated the continued use of statutory preferences ceding
pride of place to veterans, children of deceased or permanently
disabled firefighters, and the like, see, e.g., Mass. Gen. Laws
___ ____
Ann. ch. 31, 26, 40 (1992), even if those persons achieved
lower test scores than other qualified white candidates.

4














In the district court, appellants sought a salmagundi

of relief, including an order placing their names at the top of

the certified eligibility list and an injunction prohibiting

continued preferential treatment of black and Spanish-surnamed

persons in connection with available firefighting jobs. They

contended that Boston had met the decree's objectives because, in

1989, the Department had achieved a percentage of black and

Spanish-surnamed members higher than the percentage of such

minorities in Boston's general population at the time the decree

was originally entered. Appellants also claimed that, to the

extent anything remained to be done, the decree's ameliorative

purposes could be satisfactorily accommodated without any

affirmative action because the 1987 entrance examination for

firefighters was race-neutral. Finally, appellants charged that

the decree swept too broadly and, therefore, should not be

enforced.

In due course, both sides moved for summary judgment.

The district court denied the plaintiffs' motion and granted the

defendants' motion. At that point, plaintiffs switched gears,

moving for reconsideration on completely different grounds. The

district court denied the motion. On appeal, plaintiffs protest

both the entry of summary judgment and the ensuing refusal to

reconsider.

II. THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE
II. THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE

It is clear that, when a judicial decree affording

race-conscious relief is challenged, the decree must be subjected


5














to strict scrutiny. See City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488
___ ________________ _______________

U.S. 469, 494 (1989) (plurality opinion); Wygant v. Jackson Bd.
______ ___________

of Educ., 476 U.S. 267, 273 (1986) (plurality opinion). Such
________

scrutiny requires a reviewing court to vouchsafe that the relief

is both warranted by a strong state interest and narrowly

tailored to further that interest. See Stuart v. Roache, 951
___ ______ ______

F.2d 446, 449 (1st Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 60 U.S.L.W. 3689
_____ ______

(1992). It cannot be gainsaid that, when a race-conscious

employment initiative is reasonably necessary to remedy the

effects of past discrimination practiced by a public employer, a

compelling state interest exists. See United States v. Paradise,
___ _____________ ________

480 U.S. 149, 167 (1987) (plurality opinion); Stuart, 951 F.2d at
______

449. In this case, appellants do not argue that the original

finding of discrimination was flawed. Rather, their focus is on

the continuing need for affirmative action, and particularly, the

need for the type and kind of affirmative action required by the

Beecher decree.
_______

Along those lines, we believe that district courts

should be flexible in considering requests for relaxation of, or

release from, decrees which were initially established to bring

about needed institutional reforms. See Rufo v. Inmates of
___ ____ ___________

Suffolk County Jail, 112 S. Ct. 748, 760 (1992) (considering
____________________

motion to modify a consent decree). In the context of civil

rights litigation, a central consideration in determining whether

to dissolve structural remedies is whether the agency in question

has come into compliance with constitutional requirements. Put


6














another way, an inquiring court should ask whether the goals of

the litigation, as incorporated in the outstanding decree, have

been completely achieved. Board of Educ. v. Dowell, 111 S. Ct.
_______________ ______

630, 636-37 (1991). Moreover, federal courts, in mulling whether

to relax or abandon their supervision over the operation of local

governmental units, should take federalism concerns into account,

ever mindful that the "legal justification for displacement of

local authority . . . is a violation of the Constitution by the

local authorities." Id. at 637. An intrusion by a federal court
___

into the affairs of local government should be kept to a bare

minimum and not be allowed to continue after the violation has

abated and its pernicious effects have been cured.

To the extent that the plaintiffs here are seeking

relaxation of one or more consent decrees, see supra pp. 2-3, it
___ _____

must be remembered that "a party seeking modification of a

consent decree bears the burden of establishing that a

significant change in circumstances warrants a revision of the

decree." Rufo, 112 S. Ct. at 760. That party "may meet its
____

initial burden by showing either a significant change in factual

conditions or in law." Id. Dissolution or relaxation of a
___

consent decree may be justified in a variety of circumstances,

for example, when "changed factual conditions make compliance

with the decree substantially more onerous." Id.; see also id.
___ ___ ____ ___

at 760-63 (listing other bases for modifying or dissolving a

consent decree in the context of an institutional reform case).

III. ANALYSIS
III. ANALYSIS


7














It is against this backdrop that we turn to appellants'

asseverational array. We treat serially with appellants' three

main arguments. We then deal in one fell swoop with the

exhortations contained in the motion for reconsideration.

A.
A.
__

Positing that the decree contemplates no more than the

achievement of minority representation in the Department

commensurate with the percentage of minorities resident in Boston

at the time the decree was entered, appellants assert that the

Department has already reached this modest pinnacle. Even

assuming that the factual premise anent the Department's present

composition is true, this postulate tortures the language of the

decree, disregards the parties' consistent practice while

operating under the decree, and defies common sense.

First, the relevant language of the decree is most

naturally read as referring to contemporaneous population

figures: "As a city or town achieves a complement of minorities

commensurate with the percentage of minorities within the

community, certification will be made according to existing

Massachusetts law." Beecher, 371 F. Supp. at 523. Had the
_______

district court and the existing parties intended to embody in the

decree a stipulation that a community would be released from the

prescribed procedures upon reaching a complement of minorities

commensurate with the percentage of minorities within the

community in 1974, we feel confident that the decree would have

said so.


8














Second, the undisputed evidence concerning practice

under the decree indicates beyond hope of contradiction that

applications for the release of municipalities from the decree's

burdens have universally been guided by reference to

contemporaneous population statistics. Few things evidence a

decree's meaning more persuasively than an immutable, decade-old

pattern of past practice under the decree, consensually engaged

in by all sides in the underlying litigation that produced the

decree.

Third, common sense suggests that it would be whimsical

to peg parity ratios to obsolete population figures in this sort

of context. The logical extension of appellants' argument is

that a locality could not be freed from the decree's requirements

even if its minority population dropped precipitously, to the

point where the percentage of minority firefighters in service

far exceeded the current percentage of minorities in the relevant

population, as long as the percentage of minority firefighters

remained lower than the 1974 percentage. We think it is

farfetched to assume that the district court or the parties

intended the decree to work in so quirky a fashion.

In addition to the obvious practical problems with

using outdated statistics, there are also sound legal reasons for

reading the terms of the decree to refer to current population

levels. One implication of the recent Supreme Court school

desegregation decisions is that federal courts, at least in the

minerun of civil rights and institutional reform cases, have no


9














choice but to make decisions about the maintenance, modification,

or dissolution of structural remedial orders by referring to the

most current population statistics readily available. After all,

knowledge of demographic shifts is essential for determining

whether patterns of minority representation in state institutions

and organizations reflect state action, which has constitutional

implications, or private preferences, which, generally, do not.

See, e.g., Freeman v. Pitts, 112 S. Ct. 1430, 1437-38, 1447-48
___ ____ _______ _____

(1992). We think that the plaintiffs' effort to cling to 1974

statistics, notwithstanding the availability of supervening

census data, contradicts Freeman's teachings.
_______

In sum, achieving parity in 1974 terms, without more,

was not a particularly significant datum. In any event, it did

not serve, in 1989, as a legally sufficient basis for

defenestrating the Beecher decree.
_______

B.
B.
__

Next, appellants contend that the decree was satisfied

because the qualifying examination that they passed was validated

under EEOC guidelines and was, therefore, nondiscriminatory.

This argument overlooks the language of the decree itself. Even

a cursory reading makes it crystal clear that validated

examinations are not an end in themselves but merely a means

toward achieving the decree's actual objective: rough parity (to

remedy the effects of past discrimination). See, e.g., Beecher,
___ ____ _______

371 F. Supp. at 522 ("Subsequent to obtaining the results of a

valid examination, the defendant . . . shall promptly commence


10














certifying applicants as eligible for appointment [in the

manner directed by the decree] . . . ."); id. at 522-23
___

(specifying that the "hiring procedure shall apply to all future

eligibility lists established subsequent to a valid firefighter

entrance examination"). The argument to the contrary is a mere

heuristic.3

C.
C.
__

The appellants also hawk the idea that, even if the

goals of the Beecher decree have not yet been accomplished, the
_______

decree is constitutionally infirm because it sweeps too broadly.

This argument is by no means a new one. Over 15 years ago, we

found the decree to be narrowly tailored toward the achievement

of its legitimate objectives. See Beecher, 504 F.2d at 1027
___ _______

(judging the decree to be "carefully limited in extent and

duration"). To be sure, in the intervening years the tests for

determining whether remedial race-conscious relief is, in fact,

narrowly tailored have been refined and clarified. See, e.g.,
___ ____

____________________

3The district court, noting that the test's validity was
disputed, correctly ruled that the issue was not material. Even
if the examination was nondiscriminatory, as appellants alleged,
the paucity of minority representation in the Department
betokened a failure to achieve the central goal of the decree,
thus negating any argument that the purposes of the decree had
been achieved. Summary judgment was, therefore, appropriate.
See, e.g., Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247-48
___ ____ ________ ___________________
(1986) (stating that "the mere existence of some alleged factual
____
dispute between the parties will not defeat an otherwise properly
supported motion for summary judgment" absent the existence of a
genuine issue of material fact); Mesnick v. General Elec. Co.,
_______ __________________
950 F.2d 816, 822 (1st Cir. 1991) ("Not every discrepancy in the
proof is enough to forestall a properly supported motion for
summary judgment; the disagreement must relate to some genuine
issue of material fact."), petition for cert. filed, 60 U.S.L.W.
________________________
3689 (U.S. March 9, 1992).

11














Paradise, 480 U.S. at 177-79 (plurality opinion); Stuart, 951
________ ______

F.2d at 453-55. But, that process of refinement and

clarification does nothing to call the adequacy of the instant

decree into serious question.

We will not wax longiloquent. In determining whether

or not an order is narrowly tailored, a significant measure of

deference is owed to the trial court's conclusion that a

particular kind of relief is essential to heal a constitutional

wound. See Paradise, 480 U.S. at 183 (plurality opinion). The
___ ________

district court, unlike the court of appeals, "has firsthand

experience with the parties and is best qualified to deal with

the 'flinty, intractable realities of day-to-day implementation

of constitutional commands.'" Id. at 184 (citation omitted).
___

While a district court's discretion is not unbridled, a reviewing

court, in assessing whether a remedy is narrowly tailored, must

bear in mind that the fashioning of a structural decree, like the

decision as to whether to modify or dissolve it, is at bottom an

exercise of equitable power. See Freeman, 112 S. Ct. at 1444.
___ _______

Given this deferential standard of review, appellants are

whistling past the graveyard albeit whistling rather loudly

in inveighing against the reach of the decree's remedial

provisions.

In assessing an overbreadth challenge to an order

directing race-conscious relief in the context of public

employment, a court should consider, inter alia, the extent to
_____ ____

which (i) the beneficiaries of the order are specially


12














advantaged, (ii) the legitimate expectancies of others are

frustrated or encumbered, (iii) the order interferes with other

valid state or local policies, and (iv) the order contains (or

fails to contain) built-in mechanisms which will, if time and

events warrant, shrink its scope and limit its duration. The

Beecher decree passes this test with flying colors.
_______



In this case, only qualified minority candidates are
_________

specially advantaged; no minority candidate is placed on the

eligibility list unless he or she has attained a passing score on

the entrance examination. This is an important indicium of

narrow tailoring. See Stuart, 951 F.2d at 454. Relatedly, the
___ ______

decree does not require that minority aspirants be appointed, nor

does it dispense with the statutory preferences mandated by state

law. Thus, the decree gives only a limited advantage, not a

guarantee of employment, to minority applicants. This, too, is a

significant factor. See Johnson v. Transportation Agency, 480
___ _______ ______________________

U.S. 616, 638 (1987) (approving affirmative action plan because,

among other things, rather than mandating quota hiring, it

"merely authorize[d] that consideration be given to affirmative

action concerns when evaluating qualified applicants"). As a

result of these features, it can appropriately be said that the

Beecher decree "is not being used simply to achieve and maintain
_______

racial balance, but rather as a benchmark against which the court

could gauge . . . efforts to remedy past discrimination." Local
_____

28, Sheet Metal Workers' Int'l Ass'n v. EEOC, 478 U.S. 421, 477-
_____________________________________ ____


13














78 (1986) (plurality opinion).

Moreover, the failure to appoint more high-scoring

white applicants under the decree disturbs no legitimate, firmly

rooted expectations on the part of those applicants. The record

shows that, when appellants sought appointment to the Department,

there were many white candidates with statutory preferences and

perfect tests scores, and few firefighters' vacancies. Hence,

irrespective of the decree, appellants could not reasonably have

felt assured that they would be appointed. This factor, too,

counsels in favor of upholding the decree. See Stuart, 951 F.2d
___ ______

at 454.

Finally, the decree's life is limited, remaining in

force only until its requirements have been met. See Beecher,
___ _______

371 F. Supp. at 523 (providing for release from appointment

process mandated by the decree "[a]s a city or town achieves a

complement of minorities commensurate with the percentage of

minorities within the community"). Limitations of this sort are

crucial factors in deflecting overbreadth challenges. See
___

Stuart, 951 F.2d at 454. Indeed, the proof of the present
______

pudding is that, since 1974, more than fifty percent of the

communities originally affected by the decree have already been

freed from further oversight.

Mindful of these realities, we conclude that the

Beecher decree is tailored with sufficient precision to withstand
_______

the appellants' imprecations.

D.
D.
__


14














On the motion for reconsideration, appellants

unsuccessfully attempted to raise two additional arguments. They

claimed, first, that the Department's achievements under the

decree should be measured not by reference to the census figures

for black and Spanish-surnamed individuals in the general

population, but by reference to the census of such persons age 18

or older, thus dovetailing more snugly with the relevant labor

pool. They also suggested that blacks and Spanish-surnamed

individuals should be considered separately; and that, therefore,

black aspirants should not be entitled to a continuing preference

as Boston had exceeded the decree's goals with respect to black

firefighters.

We need not dwell on the substance of these arguments.

It is settled law that, once a motion to dismiss or a motion for

summary judgment has been granted, the district court has

substantial discretion in deciding whether to reopen the

proceedings in order to allow the unsuccessful party to introduce

new material or argue a new theory. See Mariani-Giron v.
___ _____________

Acevedo-Ruiz, 945 F.2d 1, 3 (1st Cir. 1991); United States v. 5
____________ ______________ _

Bell Rock Road, 896 F.2d 605, 611 (1st Cir. 1990); Appeal of Sun
_______________ _____________

Pipe Line Co., 831 F.2d 22, 25 (1st Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 486
_____________ _____ ______

U.S. 1055 (1988); Polyplastics, Inc. v. Transconex, Inc., 827
__________________ _________________

F.2d 859, 864 n.4 (1st Cir. 1987); Pagan v. American Airlines,
_____ __________________

Inc., 534 F.2d 990, 992-93 (1st Cir. 1976). Consequently, we
____

will overturn the trial court's decision on such a matter only if

an appellant can persuade us that the refusal to grant favorable


15














reconsideration was a clear abuse of discretion. Sun Pipe Line,
_____________

831 F.2d at 25; Pagan, 534 F.2d at 993.
_____

Here, there is not so much as a whisper of a hint of an

intimation of an abuse of discretion. The statistics upon which

appellants belatedly sought to rely (in order to show a more

precisely defined labor pool) were available to them all along.

Moreover, those statistics, fairly read, likely tell a different

story than appellants intend to convey. The most pertinent

"labor pool" information that can be gleaned from the 1980 census

figures is the head count of black and Spanish-surnamed

individuals who were ten years of age, or older, in 1980 a

number which would give some approximate indication of the number

of black and Spanish-surnamed individuals who, in 1989, were old

enough to be considered for firefighters' positions.4 Based on

those figures, a continuing lack of parity in the Department is

statistically evident.

Appellants' other "new" argument that the percentage

figures for black and Spanish-surnamed individuals should be

dismembered, so that once parity with the percentage of blacks in

the labor force is achieved, the decree's guidelines for

certifying blacks to the eligibility list should be lifted

fares no better. Once again, the argument relied on information

that was available well before the time suit was started.

Moreover, such an approach clearly contradicts the format of the

____________________

4Under state law, see Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 31, 58
___
(1992), firefighters must be at least 19 years of age to qualify
for appointment.

16














original litigation, which constituted combined classes of black

and Spanish-surnamed persons, not separate black and Spanish-

surnamed classes. It also contradicts the clear intent of the

decree and an unbroken skein of preexisting practice under the

decree's terms.

When the losing party seeks reconsideration of an

adverse judgment on a neoteric theory, factors such as due

diligence and likelihood of success must weigh heavily in the

balance. Where, as here, the movants' newly emergent arguments

seem weak and the movants have offered no viable excuse for not

advancing those arguments in a timely fashion when the parties

cross-moved for summary judgment, we are unable to discern any

principled basis on which the district court's denial of the

motion for reconsideration might be overturned. In this case, as

in most similarly postured cases, the district court's refusal to

allow appellants the opportunity to revisit the barn after the

horse has departed cannot be considered an abuse of discretion.



Affirmed.
Affirmed.
________
















17