Law Commons^™

Causation In Civil Rights Legislation, Hillel J. Bavli

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Employees are often left unprotected from discrimination because they are unable to satisfy the requirement of causation. Courts have made clear that to obtain legal redress for discrimination, it is generally insufficient to show that a protected characteristic such as race or sex was a “motivating factor” of an adverse employment decision. Rather, under Supreme Court precedent—including the Court’s Comcast and Babb decisions in the 2020 term—the antidiscrimination statutes generally require a showing of “but-for” causation. Consequently, many victims of discrimination will be unable to prevail because an employer can readily refute allegations of discrimination by asserting a legitimate purpose—true …

Expanding The Core: Pregnancy Discrimination Law As It Approaches Full Term, Joanna L. Grossman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The advocates behind the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) of 1978 had one very specific mission: to override the Supreme Court’s 1976 decision in General Electric v. Gilbert, in which it had curiously held that pregnancy discrimination had nothing to do with gender and was thus not a form of actionable sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court was not acting on a blank slate; it had used the same reasoning two years earlier to hold, in Geduldig v. Aiello, that pregnancy discrimination was not sex discrimination for equal protection purposes and therefore was …

Introduction To Amici Curiae Brief In Young V. United Parcel Service, Inc., Joanna L. Grossman, Deborah L. Brake

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

On March 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., the most important pregnancy discrimination case before the Court in nearly a quarter century. The Court ruled for Peggy Young in a decision that will chart the path of pregnancy discrimination litigation for years to come. Our brief, published here with a short introduction, lays out our theory for why an employer’s refusal to accommodate pregnancy with light-duty assignments on the same terms as other medical conditions similarly affecting work violates Title VII and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The brief was …

Making Pregnancy Work: Overcoming The Pregnancy Discrimination Act's Capacity-Based Model, Joanna L. Grossman, Gillian Thomas

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article considers the gaps and obstacles in current law faced by the pregnant woman whose job duties may conflict with pregnancy's physical effects. While there is no inherent conflict between pregnancy and work, women in physically strenuous or hazardous occupations, from nursing to law enforcement, routinely confront situations in which they are physically unable to perform aspects of their job or, though physically able, they seek to avoid certain tasks or situations because of the potential risks to maternal or fetal health. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 (PDA) broadly protects against "pregnancy discrimination," but it provides absolute rights …

The Failure Of Title Vii As A Rights-Claiming System, Deborah L. Brake, Joanna L. Grossman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This Article takes a comprehensive look at the failure of Title VII as a system for claiming nondiscrimination rights. The Supreme Court's recent decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, 127 S. Ct. 2162 (2007), requiring an employee to assert a Title VII pay discrimination claim within 180 days of when the discriminatory pay decision was first made, marks the tip of the iceberg in this flawed system. In the past decade, Title VII doctrines at both ends of the rights-claiming process have become increasing hostile to employees. At the front end, Title VII imposes strict requirements on …

The First Bite Is Free: Employer Liability For Sexual Harassment, Joanna L. Grossman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In June, 1998, the Supreme Court issued two decisions, Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth and Faragher v. City of Boca Raton that established new standards for employer liability for sexual harassment. Although the two cases presented different questions and factual predicates, the Court adopted a unified holding with respect to employer liability for supervisor harassment. Many commentators interpreted the new standards as a blow to employers based on the perception that employers would now be held accountable for workplace harassment without regard to their culpability.

The thesis of this article is that the conventional wisdom with respect to Faragher and …

Same-Sex Sexual Harassment Under Title Vii, Dale Carpenter

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits private employment discrimination on the basis of "sex." In 1986, the United States Supreme Court interpreted the "no sex discrimination" command of Title VII to forbid sexual harassment on the job. In the wake of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, perhaps no single area of the law is in a greater state of flux than the question of whether sexual harassment by a member of one sex against a member of the same sex is actionable under Title VII.

This Article examines the state of federal law on the …