Supreme Court Redefines Workplace Discrimination

Pair of rulings narrow definitions, set stricter rules for discrimination lawsuits.

By Chris Hoenig

The Supreme Court, in a pair of decisions handed down on Monday, narrowed the rules and definitions for bringing lawsuits based on workplace discrimination.

In a 5-to-4 ruling, the justices restricted the definition of a supervisor to someone with direct hiring and firing powers and the authority to prevent someone from being promoted, regardless of how the relationship is perceived in the workplace. The case, Vance v. Ball State University, centered on Maetta Vance, a Black woman who said she had been harassed and subjected to racial slurs during her time as a caterer at the college. Vance identified the tormenter as her supervisor, making the university directly liable for the discrimination.

The court ruled, however, that the harasser did not have the ability to "injure" Vance's employment with the university (by hiring, firing or preventing a promotion), making that person a co-worker instead of a supervisor. The university, and any other workplace, is held liable in discrimination lawsuits only if the person being harassed notifies the employer of the discrimination and nothing is done to stop it. Because of that, the Supreme Court's ruling dismisses the lawsuit against the school.

In the second case, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the justices set limitations on what juries can consider and award in discrimination cases. The decision, also by a 5-to-4 margin, essentially divides workplace-discrimination lawsuits into two categories: "status-based discrimination," which protects employees against direct racial, religious, gender and ethnic discrimination in cases of hiring, firing, salary, promotion and other similar circumstances; and "employer retaliation," which separates lawsuits brought by employees who claim to have had their employment "injured" on account of having opposed, complained of, or sought remedies for workplace discrimination.

Under the separation, employer-retaliation cases need to show a direct link between the complaints or actions of the employee and retaliatory actions of the employer that are so close that the employer's moves would not have happened but for the employee's. Status-based cases only need to show that discrimination is one of the employer's motives, even if there are other, lawful motives that played into their decision.

In the case before the court, Dr. Naiel Nassar claimed that the medical center withdrew a job offer after the offer was opposed by a university supervisor whom Nassar had lodged discrimination complaints against. A jury, which was told that it only had to find that retaliation was a motivating factor in the decision, awarded Nassar $3 million in damages. The ruling from the justices says that the jury should have been informed that it had to decide whether retaliation was the "but-for" reason in the supervisor's actions, and sent the case back to the lower court.

These decisions by the court are likely to limit the number and scope of workplace-discrimination lawsuits brought by employees.

One in 10 Irish People Think Men Should Not Vote in Ireland Abortion Referendum

A most conservative country when it comes to abortion rights begins to wake up to the logical conclusion that if your gender can't bear children, you should probably stop mansplaining and man-deciding.

Presiding Officer Carmel McBride prepares the polling station for the referendum on liberalizing abortion law . / REUTERS

Ireland is one of Europe's most socially conservative countries, with one of the world's strictest bans on abortion. Residents went to the polls on Friday for a "once in a generation opportunity" to decide whether to liberalize or maintain the country's abortion laws.

For Americans, conservatives trying to control abortion rights using religion sound all too familiar.

Read More Show Less

Jury Awards $28M to Haitian-American Nurse Who Stood Up for Coworker

Brigham and Women's Hospital retaliated against a nurse for defending a coworker amid alleged verbal abuse.

Gessy Toussaint — who shares the name of the best-known leader of the Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L'Ouverture — also believes in fighting against the odds and winning.

A Suffolk Superior Court jury ruled on Wednesday that Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Mass., retaliated against Toussaint, a Haitian-American nurse who stood up for a colleague, and has awarded her $28 million. Deliberation took more than three days.

Read More Show Less

Twenty-one white people (including seven male board members and CEO Steve Simon) of a total of 22 people in the World Tennis Association's (WTA) management made the call to boot Serena Williams from seeding for the French Open for having a baby.

Read More Show Less

Maxine Waters Attacked in Congress as she Sought to Protect People from Predators in the Auto Loan Industry

Racist smears and whitesplaining from "men." What's behind the vitriol? If racism is ignored by victims, does it go away?

On Friday, Reps. Mike Kelly and Maxine Waters debated over the House voting to roll back a Consumer Financial Protections Bureau rule meant to limit discrimination in distributing auto loans. Studies have shown Blacks and Latinos have systemically been charged a higher markup on auto loans than white borrowers, and class action lawsuits were brought against auto lenders as a result. Waters advocated for another look at how this vote would impact auto loan practices with people of color. But those on the right insist talk of discrimination is steering away from the country being unified.

Read More Show Less

Salma Hayek Calls for Male Stars to Get Pay Cut

"We all have to be part of the adjustment. That's one idea. I'm going to be hated for it. I hope I can get a job after this!" Hayek said.


(Reuters) — Mexican American actress Salma Hayek, a vocal campaigner against sexual harassment in the movie industry, said on Sunday male stars should get less pay as way to even things up with chronically underpaid women.

Read More Show Less

Reason 1,000 Why Ben Carson Gets a Side Eye — HUD Is Being Sued by Civil Rights Groups

Carson is under fire for sidelining a housing regulation rule that discourages racial segregation.

President Donald Trump appointed Ben Carson secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) without any prior experience except that Carson "grew up in an inner city." Now Carson is leaving the door wide open for housing discrimination.

Read More Show Less