U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

LICENSING RESTRICTIONS AGAINST EX-OFFENDERS - MILLER V CARTER - EX-OFFENDERS MUST BE TREATED EQUALLY - IS THAT BAD OR GOOD?,547 F 2D 1374 (7TH CIR 1977)

NCJ Number
58348
Journal
University of Toledo Law Review Volume: 10 Issue: 2 Dated: (WINTER 1979) Pages: 562-605
Author(s)
R D SALSBURY
Date Published
1979
Length
44 pages
Annotation
AN EXAMINATION OF THE FEDERAL COURT RESPONSE TO LICENSING RESTRICTIONS AGAINST EX-CONVICTS SUPPORTS THE ARGUMENT THAT PUBLIC ACTIONS AND LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES ARE NEEDED TO REMOVE THESE EMPLOYMENT BARRIERS.
Abstract
THE DECISION BY THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS IN THE CASE OF MILLER V. CARTER, (1977) ON LICENSING RESTRICTIONS AFFIRMED BY A SPLIT U.S. SUPREME COURT, HAS PROVEN TO BE A DISAPPOINTMENT TO THOSE WHO SOUGHT EXTENSIVE REFORMS THROUGH THE JUDICIAL PROCESS. HOWEVER, IT DEMONSTRATES THAT SMALL GAINS CAN BE MADE THROUGH DILIGENT CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES TO SUCH LICENSING RESTRICTIONS. EVEN THOUGH THIS DECISION HELD A CHICAGO ORDINANCE BARRING CERTAIN CLASSES OF EX-OFFENDERS FROM OBTAINING A CHAUFFEUR'S LICENSE TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IT WAS SO NARROWLY RESTRICTED THAT IT OFFERS LITTLE HOPE FOR BROAD-SCALE REFORM OF SUCH LICENSING RESTRICTIONS. THE INCREASING NUMBER OF CHALLENGES TO SUCH LICENSING RESTRICTIONS HAS BECOME A CLASSICAL STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE NEED TO ENSURE PUBLIC SAFETY THROUGH LICENSING PROCEDURES AND THE RIGHTS OF EX-OFFENDERS TO GET A JOB. JUDICIAL DEVELOPMENTS ON THIS ISSUE ARE EXAMINED IN TERMS OF CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES TO SUCH LICENSING STATUTES AND THE APPLICABLE STANDARD OF REVIEW. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE LIMITED PROTECTION OFFERED EX-OFFENDERS IN THE MILLER V. CARTER CASE, HAS BEEN SERIOUSLY UNDERMINED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THE NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY V. BEAZER CASE. AN ALTERNATIVE TO USING CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENTS IN SUCH COURT CASES COULD BE THE USE OF THE DISPARATE IMPACT TEST ESTABLISHED BY TITLE VII. THIS HAS PROVEN USEFUL FOR MINORITY EX-OFFENDERS. HOWEVER, THE MOST HOPEFUL AVENUE FOR CHANGE RESTS IN THE PASSAGE OF STATE LEGISLATION. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (KCP)