No. 11-345 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ———— ABIGAIL NOEL FISHER, Petitioner, v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, et al., Respondents. ———— On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ———— BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF NEITHER PARTY ———— JEFFREY A. NORRIS RAE T. VANN Counsel of Record ANN ELIZABETH REESMAN NORRIS, TYSSE, LAMPLEY & LAKIS, LLP 1501 M Street, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 [email protected] (202) 629-5600 Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Equal Employment Advisory Council May 2012 WILSON-EPES PRINTING CO., INC. – (202) 789-0096 – WASHINGTON, D. C. 20002 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................ iii INTEREST OF THE AMICUS CURIAE ............ 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ............................ 3 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................. 5 ARGUMENT ........................................................ 6 REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE, THIS COURT SHOULD BE COGNIZANT OF THE POTENTIAL EFFECT OF ITS DECISION ON PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYERS ................................. 6 A. This Court’s Decision Should Not Make It More Difficult For Federal Con- tractors To Comply With Federally- Mandated Affirmative Action Require- ments ......................................................... 6 1. Companies That Contract with the Federal Government Must Meet Rig- orous Affirmative Action Compliance Standards ............................................. 6 a. The Static Measure of Affirmative Action – Evaluating Utilization Patterns .......................................... 10 b. The Dynamic Measure of Affirma- tive Action – Evaluating Potential Adverse Impact ............................... 12 c. Federal Contractors Must Address Potential Problem Areas – Action- Oriented Programs ......................... 15 (i) ii TABLE OF CONTENTS—Continued Page 2. OFCCP Is Increasing Its Scrutiny of Contractors’ Affirmative Action Com- pliance Efforts...................................... 17 B. This Court’s Decision Should Not Make It More Difficult For Employers To Maintain Successful Voluntary Diver- sity Initiatives ........................................... 20 CONCLUSION .................................................... 24 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES FEDERAL CASES Page Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) ... 3, 5, 24 CONSTITUTIONS U.S. Constitution amendment XIV, § 1 ....... 3, 4 FEDERAL STATUTES Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 793 .......................................... 7, 17 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. ......................... 2 Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act, 38 U.S.C. § 4211 et seq. ............................. 7, 17 FEDERAL REGULATIONS 29 C.F.R. § 1602.7 ........................................ 13 41 C.F.R. ch. 60 (2012) ................................. 2, 6 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.4(a)(1) ................................. 7 41 C.F.R. § 60-1.20(a)(1) ............................... 19 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.1 ......................................... 10 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.10(a)(1), (3) ........................ 15 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.12 ....................................... 10 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.13 ....................................... 10 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.14 ....................................... 10 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.15(a) ................................... 9, 10 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.15(b) ................................... 11 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.16(a) ................................... 11 iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued Page 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.16(c) ................................... 11 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.16(e) ................................... 8 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.16(e)(1) ............................... 11 41 C.F.R. § 60-2.17(c) ................................... 15 41 C.F.R. § 60-3.4 ......................................... 9, 12 41 C.F.R. § 60-3.14(B)(5) .............................. 12 41 C.F.R. § 60-300.5 ..................................... 7 41 C.F.R. § 60-741.5 ..................................... 7 76 Fed. Reg. 23,358 (Apr. 26, 2011) ............. 17 76 Fed. Reg. 77,056 (Dec. 9, 2011) ............... 17 STATE STATUTES Texas Education Code § 51.803 (1997 & Supp. 2012) ............................................... 3, 4 Texas Education Code § 51.803(a-1) (2009 & Supp. 2012)............................................ 4 OTHER AUTHORITIES Executive Order No. 11,246, 30 Fed. Reg. 12,319 (Sept. 24, 1965) ............................ passim Executive Order No. 11,375, 32 Fed. Reg. 14,303 (Oct. 13, 1967) ............................... 2 Executive Order No. 12,086, 43 Fed. Reg. 46,501 (Oct. 5, 1978) ................................. 2 Executive Order No. 13,279, 67 Fed. Reg. 77,141 (Dec. 12, 2002) ............................... 2 Fiscal Year 2013 Congressional Budget Justification, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs ............................... 18 v TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued Page Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, United States Department of Labor, Federal Contract Compliance Manual § 2O01 .......................................... 12, 13 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Projections – Civilian labor force by age, sex, race, and ethnicity, Table 3.4 ............ 22, 23 United States Department of Labor, Data Enforcement, OFCCP Compliance Eval- uation and Complaint Investigation Data, Dataset Summary (Apr. 7, 2010) ... 20 United States Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commission, Job Patterns For Minorities And Women In Private Industry (EEO-1) ...................................... 13 United States Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commission, Job Patterns For Minorities And Women In Private Industry: A Glossary ................................. 13, 14 World Trade Organization, International Trade Statistics 2011, Table I.8, Leading exporters and importers in world mer- chandise trade, 2010 ................................. 21 World Trade Organization, International Trade Statistics 2011, Table I.13, Mer- chandise trade of the United States by origin and destination, 2010 .................... 22 World Trade Organization, International Trade Statistics 2002, Table III.17, Merchandise trade of the United States by region and economy, 2001 .................... 22 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ———— No. 11-345 ———— ABIGAIL NOEL FISHER, Petitioner, v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, et al., Respondents. ———— On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ———— BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF NEITHER PARTY ———— The Equal Employment Advisory Council respect- fully submits this brief amicus curiae pursuant to Rule 37 in support of neither party.1 1 The parties have consented to the filing of this brief. No counsel for a party authored this brief in whole or in part, and no counsel or party made a monetary contribution intended to fund the preparation or submission of this brief. No person other than amicus curiae, its members, or its counsel, made a monetary contribution to the preparation or submission of the brief. 2 INTEREST OF THE AMICUS CURIAE The Equal Employment Advisory Council (EEAC) is a nationwide association of employers organized in 1976 to promote sound approaches to the elimination of discriminatory employment practices. Its member- ship includes nearly 300 of the nation’s largest private sector companies that collectively employ roughly 20 million workers. EEAC’s directors and officers include many of industry’s leading experts in the field of equal employment opportunity. Their combined experience gives EEAC an unmatched depth of knowledge of the practical, as well as legal, considerations relevant to the proper interpretation and application of equal employment policies and requirements. EEAC’s members are firmly commit- ted to the principles of nondiscrimination and equal employment opportunity. EEAC’s corporate members all are employers sub- ject to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., as amended, and other laws against workplace discrimination. Most also are federal government contractors subject to the affirmative action requirements of Executive Order 11,246, 30 Fed. Reg. 12,319 (Sept. 24, 1965), as amended by Executive Order 11,375, 32 Fed. Reg. 14,303 (Oct. 13, 1967), Executive Order 12,086, 43 Fed. Reg. 46,501 (Oct. 5, 1978), Executive Order 13,279, 67 Fed. Reg. 77,141 (Dec. 12, 2002), and the implementing regulations under 41 C.F.R. ch. 60 (2012). In addition, many EEAC member companies have voluntary programs to ensure that their work- forces are diverse with respect to race, gender, cul- ture, background, and other characteristics. EEAC’s member representatives typically are corporate offi- cials charged with responsibility for implementing 3 and complying with these nondiscrimination and affirmative action mandates and diversity initiatives. The question presented for review is whether this Court’s decisions interpreting the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, including Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), permit the University of Texas at Austin’s consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions. Petitioners seek reversal of the decision below holding that the University’s actions are lawful. Although the question before the Court does not directly involve an issue of law applicable to private sector employers, EEAC’s member companies never- theless