In the 1982 case, Guardians Association et al. v. Civil Service Commission of the City of New York et al., a group of minority police officers known as The Guardians Association sued the Civil Service Commission over its use of written tests for promotions within the New York Police Department. They argued that these tests were discriminatory and had a disparate impact on racial minorities, violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act which prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs or activities. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of The Guardians Association but was divided on their reasoning: some justices believed that any practice with a discriminatory effect violated Title VI while others thought it only applied to intentional discrimination. Ultimately, this landmark decision established that practices resulting in "disparate impact" could be considered discriminatory under federal law even if there is no intent to discriminate.

In the case of Guardians Association v. Civil Service Commission, Justice Powell's dissenting opinion argued that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act does not allow for private lawsuits based on a theory of disparate impact discrimination. He maintained that Congress intended to prohibit only intentional discrimination when it enacted Title VI and did not intend to create a private right of action for claims alleging unintentional discriminatory effects. Furthermore, he contended that allowing such suits would place an undue burden on institutions receiving federal funds by forcing them to justify any practice or policy with racially disproportionate impacts regardless if they were intentionally discriminatory or not. This interpretation, according to him, could lead these institutions into making race-conscious decisions in order to avoid litigation which contradicts the goal of achieving racial neutrality in government decision-making processes.