Fakers and Floodgates

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This symposium addresses barriers to Title VII claims. Until recently, scholars and litigants could only wonder whether Supreme Court decisions limiting discrimination law were driven by inherent judicial skepticism about the plaintiff's claims. If this skepticism existed, it remained important to the underlying doctrine, but hidden from view.

The Supreme Court's decision in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar represents a watershed moment in employment discrimination litigation. The majority opinion posited that an employee might try to avoid termination by filing a fake retaliation claim against his employer. It also expressed fears about courts, administrative agencies, and employers being subjected to floodgates of litigation. It then explicitly used these concerns about fakers and floodgates to tip substantive discrimination law in an employer-friendly direction.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)223-250
Number of pages28
JournalStanford Journal of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Volume10
Issue numberJune
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

employer
discrimination
court decision
Supreme Court
administrative court
Law
retaliation
doctrine
employee
anxiety

Keywords

  • employment discrimiation
  • Retaliation
  • frivolous
  • floodgates
  • Nassar

Cite this

Fakers and Floodgates. / Thomas, Suja A.

In: Stanford Journal of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Vol. 10, No. June , 2014, p. 223-250.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ee09baae638f435ab02c6c13e6e6adfd,
title = "Fakers and Floodgates",
abstract = "This symposium addresses barriers to Title VII claims. Until recently, scholars and litigants could only wonder whether Supreme Court decisions limiting discrimination law were driven by inherent judicial skepticism about the plaintiff's claims. If this skepticism existed, it remained important to the underlying doctrine, but hidden from view.The Supreme Court's decision in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar represents a watershed moment in employment discrimination litigation. The majority opinion posited that an employee might try to avoid termination by filing a fake retaliation claim against his employer. It also expressed fears about courts, administrative agencies, and employers being subjected to floodgates of litigation. It then explicitly used these concerns about fakers and floodgates to tip substantive discrimination law in an employer-friendly direction.",
keywords = "employment discrimiation, Retaliation, frivolous, floodgates, Nassar",
author = "Thomas, {Suja A}",
year = "2014",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "223--250",
journal = "Stanford Journal of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties",
issn = "1553-7226",
publisher = "Stanford University",
number = "June",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Fakers and Floodgates

AU - Thomas, Suja A

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - This symposium addresses barriers to Title VII claims. Until recently, scholars and litigants could only wonder whether Supreme Court decisions limiting discrimination law were driven by inherent judicial skepticism about the plaintiff's claims. If this skepticism existed, it remained important to the underlying doctrine, but hidden from view.The Supreme Court's decision in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar represents a watershed moment in employment discrimination litigation. The majority opinion posited that an employee might try to avoid termination by filing a fake retaliation claim against his employer. It also expressed fears about courts, administrative agencies, and employers being subjected to floodgates of litigation. It then explicitly used these concerns about fakers and floodgates to tip substantive discrimination law in an employer-friendly direction.

AB - This symposium addresses barriers to Title VII claims. Until recently, scholars and litigants could only wonder whether Supreme Court decisions limiting discrimination law were driven by inherent judicial skepticism about the plaintiff's claims. If this skepticism existed, it remained important to the underlying doctrine, but hidden from view.The Supreme Court's decision in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar represents a watershed moment in employment discrimination litigation. The majority opinion posited that an employee might try to avoid termination by filing a fake retaliation claim against his employer. It also expressed fears about courts, administrative agencies, and employers being subjected to floodgates of litigation. It then explicitly used these concerns about fakers and floodgates to tip substantive discrimination law in an employer-friendly direction.

KW - employment discrimiation

KW - Retaliation

KW - frivolous

KW - floodgates

KW - Nassar

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 223

EP - 250

JO - Stanford Journal of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

JF - Stanford Journal of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

SN - 1553-7226

IS - June

ER -