Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: WEDNESDAY, April 27, 1994                   TAG: 9404270097
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL                    PAGE: A1   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: Hearst Newspapers
DATELINE: WASHINGTON                                LENGTH: Medium

'91 CIVIL RIGHTS LAW NOT RETROACTIVE

Since Congress did not clearly state whether the act was retroactive, employees with cases pending when it became law cannot use it to collect damages, the court said in a pair of 8-1 rulings.

The 1991 law made it easier for plaintiffs to pursue civil rights cases against employers. At issue Tuesday were cases from Texas, filed in 1989, and Ohio, filed in 1986.

According to Richard Seymour of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the decision is likely to affect ``several thousand'' cases now in federal courts. ``We're very disappointed,'' he said.

Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the court's majority in both cases, said there is a long tradition in constitutional law of assuming that unless Congress specifies otherwise, laws take effect the day the president signs them.

``The presumption against statutory retroactivity is founded upon sound considerations of general policy and practice,'' Stevens wrote. It "accords with long-held and widely shared expectations about the usual operation of legislation.'' Joining Stevens were Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Congress included retroactivity in a 1990 version of the law, but President Bush vetoed it, Stevens noted.

By contrast, the 1991 bill that Bush signed specifically rules out retroactivity in three of 50 sections. But Congress said nothing about the effective date of the sections at issue in the cases decided Tuesday.

The employees in those cases, supported by the Clinton administration, argued that because Congress explicitly ruled out retroactivity only in the three sections, the bulk of the law must therefore be retroactive. Stevens rejected that argument.

He declared that because Congress found itself embroiled in controversy over the law's effective date, it ``viewed the matter as an open issue to be resolved by the courts.''

In a concurring opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia supported Stevens' conclusion but disputed his reliance on the legislative history of the 1991 law. Scalia said the conclusion should be based on the wording of the law. Joining Scalia were Justices Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.

Justice Harry Blackmun, the court's leading liberal who is retiring this summer, penned the lone dissent in each case. ``There is nothing unjust about holding an employer responsible for injuries caused by conduct that has been illegal for almost 30 years,'' Blackmun said.