Supreme Court Refuses to Allow Sex Discrimination Lawsuit against Wal-Mart to Go Forward as a Nationwide Class Action
ACLU and Other Groups Had Filed Brief in Support of Class Certification
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court declined to allow a class action lawsuit challenging discriminatory practices at Wal-Mart to go forward today as a nationwide class. The American Civil Liberties Union, along with 33 other civil rights and women’s rights organizations, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.
The following can be attributed to Steven R. Shapiro, legal director of the ACLU:
“The far-reaching consequences of today’s decision are not limited to Wal-Mart. By a narrow 5-4 majority, the Court has made it more difficult for victims of discrimination to seek judicial relief in a potentially wide range of cases. Many individual victims of discrimination simply cannot afford the cost of individual actions. By forcing them to that choice, today’s decision increases the likelihood that discrimination will now go unremedied in many cases. That result is unjust. It is also inconsistent with the Court’s past decisions, as Justice Ginsburg’s pointed out in her dissent.
The following can be attributed to Lenora M. Lapidus, director of the ACLU Women’s Rights Project:
“It’s unfortunate that the Court ignored evidence that women are paid less than men in every region at Wal-Mart. As the dissenting Justices noted, the evidence suggested that gender bias was widespread throughout Wal-Mart’s corporate culture. Women should be able to challenge discriminatory policies as a group.”
More information on this case can be found at:
www.aclu.org/womens-rights/wal-mart-v-dukes
ACLU and Other Groups Had Filed Brief in Support of Class Certification
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court declined to allow a class action lawsuit challenging discriminatory practices at Wal-Mart to go forward today as a nationwide class. The American Civil Liberties Union, along with 33 other civil rights and women’s rights organizations, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.
The following can be attributed to Steven R. Shapiro, legal director of the ACLU:
“The far-reaching consequences of today’s decision are not limited to Wal-Mart. By a narrow 5-4 majority, the Court has made it more difficult for victims of discrimination to seek judicial relief in a potentially wide range of cases. Many individual victims of discrimination simply cannot afford the cost of individual actions. By forcing them to that choice, today’s decision increases the likelihood that discrimination will now go unremedied in many cases. That result is unjust. It is also inconsistent with the Court’s past decisions, as Justice Ginsburg’s pointed out in her dissent.
The following can be attributed to Lenora M. Lapidus, director of the ACLU Women’s Rights Project:
“It’s unfortunate that the Court ignored evidence that women are paid less than men in every region at Wal-Mart. As the dissenting Justices noted, the evidence suggested that gender bias was widespread throughout Wal-Mart’s corporate culture. Women should be able to challenge discriminatory policies as a group.”
More information on this case can be found at:
www.aclu.org/womens-rights/wal-mart-v-dukes
Stay informed
Every month, you'll receive regular roundups of the most important civil rights and civil liberties developments. Remember: a well-informed citizenry is the best defense against tyranny.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy policy.
The latest in Smart Justice
ACLU's Vision
The American Civil Liberties Union is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America.
Learn More About Smart Justice
The ACLU Campaign for Smart Justice is an unprecedented, multiyear effort to reduce the U.S. jail and prison population by 50% and to challenge racism in the criminal legal system.