Do police departments favor dumber officers?

In Jordan v. City of New London, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that police departments can legally reject applicants who score too high on intelligence tests. Robert Jordan, a college graduate, was denied an interview after scoring a 33 on the Wonderlic Personnel Test (equivalent to an IQ of 125), which exceeded the city's maximum limit of 27. [1, 2, 3]

The Background

• The Cutoff: The City of New London, Connecticut, implemented an unconventional hiring policy by establishing both a minimum and maximum score for police applicants. 
• The Reasoning: The city argued that candidates who scored too high on cognitive ability exams (like the Wonderlic) were at a higher risk of becoming bored, experiencing job dissatisfaction, and leaving the department shortly after undergoing expensive police academy training. 
• The Lawsuit: Robert Jordan sued the city in federal court, arguing that dismissing candidates based on high intelligence violated his civil rights and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. [1, 5, 6]  

The Verdict

• Court Decision: The courts ultimately ruled in favor of the City of New London. 
• Legal Rationale: The courts and judges concluded that because the city applied the maximum score policy to all candidates equally and fairly, it did not constitute unconstitutional discrimination. The policy was deemed "rational" from a fiscal and economic standpoint. [1, 2, 4, 7]  

The Aftermath and Industry Impact

• Rejection Upheld: The courts established that highly intelligent individuals do not constitute a "protected class" under the law, meaning employers could lawfully reject candidates who are deemed overqualified. 
• Industry Standards: While the courts found New London's action lawful, many police departments across the country do not employ strict maximum intelligence cutoffs, as there are ongoing professional and psychological debates about whether intelligence directly correlates to job burnout or poor performance. [2, 9, 10, 11]  

[1] https://1cademy.com/node/example-of-cognitive-ability-testing-in-law-enforcement-selection/AOQycnTIyN4Rbus3dETI
[2] https://www.johnrisvold.com/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-for-cops/
[3] https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1997-06-08-fi-1265-story.html
[4] https://racism.org/articles/law-and-justice/criminal-justice-and-racism/136-criminal-justice-generally/2395-court-holds-a-person
[5] https://www.aele.org/apa/jordan-newlondon.html
[6] https://www.ipl.org/essay/Jordan-V-City-Of-New-London-Case-01CB67030FBD2A29
[7] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-smart-to-be-a-cop/
[8] https://www.quora.com/In-Jordan-v-New-London-the-New-London-Police-denied-Jordans-application-to-become-a-police-officer-citing-his-IQ-was-above-the-expected-score-and-rejected-him-worrying-Jordan-would-quit-since-training-is-costly-do
[9] https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/jordan-v-city-new-london-policing-hiring-and-iq-when-all-answers
[10] https://access.heinonline.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/polic26&section=27
[11] https://www.emerald.com/pijpsm/article/26/2/298/319923/Jordan-v-The-City-of-New-London-police-hiring-and