In the case of Wards Cove Packing Co., Inc. v. Atonio, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed allegations of racial discrimination in employment practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The plaintiffs were nonwhite workers at Alaskan salmon canneries who claimed that their employer segregated jobs based on race and created a racially hostile work environment. They argued that this resulted in a disparate impact on nonwhite employees, even though there was no explicit intent to discriminate. The court ruled in favor of Wards Cove Packing Company by changing how courts evaluate disparate impact claims under Title VII - shifting more burden onto plaintiffs to prove causation between an employer's practices and observed racial disparities among employees rather than just showing statistical imbalances within an organization’s workforce. This decision sparked controversy as it made proving workplace discrimination more difficult for victims, leading Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1991 which restored some protections against discriminatory hiring practices.

In the dissenting opinion for Wards Cove Packing Co., Inc. v. Atonio, Justice Blackmun criticized the majority's decision to shift the burden of proof from employers to employees in disparate impact cases under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. He argued that this change undermined Congress' intent when it enacted Title VII and would make it significantly more difficult for victims of employment discrimination to prove their claims in court. Furthermore, he disagreed with how narrowly the majority defined "business necessity," arguing that this interpretation was inconsistent with previous Supreme Court decisions and Congressional intent as well. Finally, Justice Blackmun expressed concern about how these changes could affect future civil rights litigation by potentially discouraging plaintiffs from bringing forth legitimate claims due to increased difficulty in proving them.