Cases you should know about ...

This is the second entry in an occasional series, "Cases you should know about."

NAME: Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535 (1974)

FACTS: Non-Indian employees of the Bureau of Indian Affairs claimed the employment preference for Indians in the BIA went against the Equal Employment Opportunities Act of 1972, therefore, depriving them of their full Fifth Amendment rights. A District Court agreed the preferential practice was repealed by the EEO, and the case was sent up to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

ISSUE: Did Congress intend for the preferential hiring practice of qualified Indians over non-Indians to work in the BIA to be repealed by the EEO Act?

RULE: No; the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed (and remanded) the decision reached by the District Court, to rule that Congress' preference is "reasonable and rationally designed to further Indian self-government."

RATIONALE: The Supreme Court referenced the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, which called for Indian hiring preference at the BIA. Also, the EEO Act meant to end discrimination in "most" areas of federal employment — not "all." The Court also recognized Congress' longstanding policy of tribes building themselves up, toward self-sustainment. Furthermore, the Court cited the Education Amendments of 1972 — passed after the EEO Act — which also called for Indian hiring preference in schools, another signal that Congress did not intend for Indian hiring preference in the BIA to stop. Finally, in its opinion, the Court said the preference was not "racial," nor "racial discrimination."