A ruling is expected in a race discrimination class-action in Iowa based on an update from

The plaintiffs’ attorneys say the discrimination is not necessarily a result of overt racism. They say the discriminatory hiring was often the result of implicit bias – an unconscious preference of the mostly white hiring officials for white applicants over black applicants.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs faced a key obstacle – proving the existence of something that white people might not be able to see. They had to show that discrimination might take place, even if it’s not intentional.

In an interesting subplot, the judge who certified the class action declined to remove the representative after she was convicted of embezzling $43,000 from an employer.  His reasoning:  It occurred after the alleged discrimination happened.  We question whether the prospective employers may make a case for an instinctive, “gut-level” reaction to that particular plaintiff.