Back in 1997, Robert Jordan took the patrol police recruitment test for the New London Police Department in Connecticut, USA. He completed an intelligence test called the “Wonderlic Personnel Test” and an “Achievement Test” administered by the Southeastern Connecticut Law Enforcement Council. Jordan scored 33 points, while the average for other candidates was 21.
Despite his high score, the police department “forgot” to hire Jordan. He believed his chances were over because he was 46 years old at the time, which was considered quite old for the job, especially compared to younger applicants. Still, Jordan wasn’t satisfied and filed a complaint with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. That’s when he learned the real issue was his intelligence test results.
Keith Harrigan, the city’s Assistant Director overseeing recruitment, told Jordan, “We don’t like to hire people with too high an IQ to be police officers in this city.”
Jordan’s reaction was simple shock: “Philosophically, I found it insulting to the entire law enforcement profession.”
But the police department’s logic was clear: any candidate who scored too high on the intelligence test would quickly get bored with police work and eventually quit. New London even estimated it spent $25,000 training each rookie officer, so they couldn’t afford to lose recruits right after they started.
“I just couldn’t accept it. And I found there was absolutely no evidence. No link between basic intelligence and job satisfaction or longevity,” Jordan said. “What kind of message does that send to kids? Study hard, but don’t be too smart?”
So he took the city and police department to court, accusing them of violating his equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment. But the district court sided with the police, saying “There is a legitimate reason for the police department to require officers not be too intelligent.”
Jordan appealed, but in 2000, the Second Circuit federal appeals court in New York upheld the district court’s ruling, and Jordan lost again. The court ruled that “the same criteria were applied to all test takers, so Jordan’s 14th Amendment rights were not violated.”
The most frustrating part for Jordan was that the court based its decision on documents from the test provider. The appeals court explained: “Even if there is no strong statistical correlation between high test scores and job dissatisfaction, it is enough that the city reasonably believed, based on the test provider’s materials, that such a link existed. The plaintiff presented some evidence that high scorers were not actually more dissatisfied, but that evidence did not create a genuine issue of material fact.”
In other words, what mattered was the city’s belief that the hiring test worked as intended. As long as that belief was applied equally to all candidates, no constitutional rights were violated.
After his loss, Jordan accepted his fate. But speaking to the press, he saw himself as a new face of discrimination in 1990s America. He said, “I maintain that you can’t control your basic intelligence any more than your eye color, gender, or anything else.”
Luckily for Jordan, after failing to join the police force, he found a new job with the Department of Corrections. So at least he wasn’t too smart to be a prison guard.
Source: Gigazine
