possibly the dfd used the raw score as a basis for calling back candidates for interviews. it's possible that the proportion of whites who aced the exam is much higher than blacks who did the same, or conversely it's possible that proportionally more blacks barely passed and thus didn't get called back. also, it's interesting that points 24. and 26. seem to be in contradiction: point 24. argues that the disparity in callback rate is not what would be expected from the test results, and yet point 26. argues that the disparity was caused by use of the test itself. maybe i'm missing something, but it seems like the plaintiff is trying to have it both ways
United States