he identification of a specific employment practice that caused racially disparate results. See 42 U.S.C. § 20O0e-2(k); Watson, 487 U.S. at 986-87; Griggs, 401 U.S. at 431. Unlike disparate treatment, the disparate impact theory does not require proof of improper intent [" 51 ] to sustain a Title VII v

, 52 L. Ed. 2d 396 (1977). Second, it charges that Nucor's facially neutral promotions policies and procedures had a racially disparate impact. See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 431, 91 S. Ct. 849, 28 L. Ed. 2d 158 (1971); Wal-Mart, 131 S. Ct. at 2554. Both theories are grounded in a statist

ing United States v. Salerno, 868 F.2d 524, 540 (2d Cir. 1989)); see also United States v. Ransom, 866 F.2d 574, 576 (2d Cir. 1989) (describing the Griggs rule as "promot[ing] the orderly conduct of business in both the trial and appellate courts"). In January 2021, the defendant filed an appeal from