Court Rules Against Class Action Sex Discrimination Suite

In perhaps the most closely-watched employment law class action ever, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided that up to 1.5 million women cannot proceed with their potentially multi-billion dollar employment discrimination claims alleging that Walmart, systematically pays and promotes female workers less than male workers.

CNNMoney reports that one key ruling is that most class actions seeking monetary compensation, cannot be brought under lenient procedures that were originally designed for suits seeking only injunctive relief. The ruling was unanimous, sending a sharp rebuke to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which had held otherwise by a 6-5 margin.

At the same time, the more far-reaching rulings in the case, which relate to the more fundamental question of just how much in common a million and a half women must have before they can sue as a class for gender discrimination, were decided along narrow, familiar ideological lines, 5-4.

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the opinion of the Court, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the partial dissent.

Conservatives view lawsuits like this one as coming very close to permitting gender (or race) discrimination to be proven on the basis of little more than statistical disparities in the workforce, that are extremely widespread in our society and which might simply result from a stew of complex, innocent and cultural causes. Many conservatives fear that if employers have to avoid statistical disparities to avoid getting sued, they will feel pressured to adopt secret quotas, which are illegal. ◆