In Connecticut v. Teal, 457 U.S. 440 (1982), the Supreme Court found that the fact that an employer selects sufficient numbers of minorities from among persons who passed a test to cause minority test-takers to be selected at rates equal to those of white test-takers would not serve as a defense to the disparate of the test on minority test-takers. In "The Bottom Line Limitation to the Rule of Griggs v. Duke Power Co.," 18 Univ. Mich. J. Law Reform 75 (1985), I argued that, for reasons going beyond those addressed by the Court, it reached a correct result. The article makes, I think, a number of interesting points about issues generally overlooked in this area. But I have not reread it recent enough to know whether I would presently agree with everything I said there.