How Has the Supreme Court Restricted Your Right to Sue in Court for Discrimination?
Fact Sheet - Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund - February 2004
The ability of any individual to go to court to protect his or her right to fair treatment on the job, in school, or in other public places, is the cornerstone of federal civil rights laws. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund believes that fair access to the courts is critical to the guarantee of equal rights and justice for all Americans.
However, the Supreme Court has severely limited the ability of individuals to bring such cases into court. Under two recent cases (Circuit City v. Adams and Gilmer v. Interstate/ Johnson Lane Corp.), an employer may force its employees to give up their rights to sue as a condition of employment. Instead, the employer can force any potential lawsuit into mandatory binding arbitration, with no requirement or assurance that the dispute will be resolved according to the civil rights laws.
But mandatory binding arbitration is no substitute for the courts when it comes to protecting an individual's civil rights. For example:
- Arbitrations can be secret. Moreover, there are no procedural protections in arbitration; so, for example, evidence that might not be acceptable for a judicial proceeding may be permitted in an arbitration.
- The relief offered in arbitration is generally more limited than that provided by a court, e.g., arbitration may not offer any injunctive relief that requires an employer to stop discriminatory conduct in the future.
- Employees may be required to pay for the arbitration, regardless of the outcome.
- Arbitrators do not have to know or follow the law and do not have to justify their rulings or issue written opinions.
The civil rights laws are meaningful only if they are enforced in a fair and consistent manner by the courts, as envisioned by Congress. Lawsuits brought by individuals are the primary, most efficient, and fairest method of ensuring compliance with these laws and fair standards for redress when they are violated. Employers should not be able to force workers to opt out of that system in exchange for giving someone a job.
The Effects - One Example
Circuit City Stores v. Adams
As an employee of Circuit City, Saint Clair Adams endured constant verbal harassment in the form of sexually lewd comments regarding heterosexual and homosexual acts. When his supervisors finally took his complaints seriously, Adams' co-workers were made aware of the complaints and harassed him even further.
Adams ultimately filed a discrimination suit against Circuit City, citing his hostile work environment. However, as a condition of his employment, Adams had been forced to sign an agreement to arbitrate such claims. The Supreme Court said that the agreement was binding and threw Adams' claim out of court.
