Written by David Johnson.

The Maryland Department of State Police (MDSP) has agreed to a significant settlement of $2.75 million in a discrimination lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice (DOJ). This lawsuit has unveiled troubling disparities in hiring practices based on gender and race, specifically highlighting that female and Black applicants faced significant barriers in the physical fitness and written exams required for becoming state troopers. The DOJ’s investigation revealed that these tests disproportionately impacted applicants from these groups, raising questions about fairness and the integrity of the police hiring process in Maryland.

Disparities in Test Results: A Clear Red Flag

The lawsuit reveals stark discrepancies in pass rates among different demographic groups. For the physical fitness assessment, known as the Functional Fitness Assessment Test (FFAT), a staggering 81% of male candidates succeeded, while only 51% of female candidates passed at least once. The test itself demanded physical benchmarks, such as completing 18 push-ups within one minute and running 1.5 miles in under 15 minutes and 20 seconds. This disparity raises important concerns about the appropriateness of such tests, especially given that the FFAT’s requirements may not accurately reflect the essential skills needed for police work.

Further complicating the issue, the written exam—the Police Officer Selection Test (POST)—showed a similar trend. The DOJ’s findings indicated that while approximately 91% of white candidates passed at least once, only 71% of Black candidates achieved the same result. These statistics underscore a troubling pattern of exclusion that can have dire implications for the composition of law enforcement agencies in Maryland and potentially across the nation.

The Legal Ramifications: A Step Toward Equity

The DOJ’s lawsuit asserted that the MDSP’s practices violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids employment discrimination based on race, gender, and other protected categories. The agency claimed that the FFAT and POST were not only inconsistent with job necessities but also resulted in a “disparate impact” on female and Black candidates. This legal action is a significant moment for those advocating for equity in public service employment, as it holds agencies accountable for discriminatory practices.

Kristen Clarke, assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, expressed the gravity of the situation. In her video statement, she emphasized that the Maryland State Police’s use of discriminatory hiring tests contributed to the underrepresentation of Black and female officers in law enforcement, which ultimately undermines public safety. The DOJ’s actions signal a critical shift towards addressing these systemic issues, advocating for a more equitable process for hiring law enforcement personnel.

Looking Forward: Changes in Hiring Practices

As part of the settlement, the Maryland State Police have committed to revising their testing procedures to eliminate the discriminatory elements highlighted in the lawsuit. This includes adopting new tests that adhere to lawful standards and extending priority hiring opportunities to applicants who were previously disqualified. Furthermore, up to 25 candidates who had initially failed the tests will be eligible for hire after successfully completing the new assessments.

Col. Roland L. Butler, Secretary of State Police, affirmed the agency’s commitment to meeting the guidelines set forth by the DOJ and enhancing support for sworn personnel. This commitment represents a pivotal change for the Maryland State Police, as they work towards fostering an inclusive environment that reflects the communities they serve. However, the agreement is contingent upon approval from a federal judge, underscoring that while progress is being made, vigilance is still necessary.

Our Take

This settlement is more than just a monetary compensation; it’s a stark reminder of the underlying biases that can pervade even the most esteemed public institutions. The findings of this lawsuit expose not just a failing of the Maryland State Police but also a broader issue in law enforcement recruitment practices. As public safety remains a critical concern, it’s essential that all candidates are evaluated fairly and based on their ability to perform the necessary duties rather than arbitrary benchmarks that may disadvantage certain groups.

Moreover, the commitment to revising testing protocols and prioritizing previously disqualified candidates is a positive step, but it also raises questions about the efficacy of the new systems in place. While the intention is commendable, there’s always a risk of simply replacing one form of discrimination with another if not carefully monitored. It is crucial that the public holds agencies accountable to ensure that this settlement translates into real change, benefiting both law enforcement and the communities they serve.