university
texas
southwestern
medical
center
nassar
argued
april
decided
june
petitioner
university
medical
center
university
part
university
texas
system
specializes
medical
education
affiliation
agreement
parkland
memorial
hospital
hospital
requires
hospital
offer
vacant
staff
physician
posts
university
faculty
members
respondent
physician
middle
eastern
descent
university
faculty
member
hospital
staff
physician
claimed
levine
one
supervisors
university
biased
account
religion
ethnic
heritage
complained
fitz
levine
supervisor
arranged
continue
working
hospital
without
also
university
faculty
resigned
teaching
post
sent
letter
fitz
others
stating
leaving
levine
harassment
fitz
upset
levine
public
humiliation
wanting
public
exoneration
objected
hospital
job
offer
withdrawn
respondent
filed
suit
alleging
two
discrete
title
vii
violations
first
alleged
levine
racially
religiously
motivated
harassment
resulted
constructive
discharge
university
violation
prohibits
employer
discriminating
employee
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
referred
discrimination
second
claimed
fitz
efforts
prevent
hospital
hiring
retaliation
complaining
levine
harassment
violation
prohibits
employer
retaliation
employee
opposed
unlawful
employment
practice
made
title
vii
charge
jury
found
respondent
claims
fifth
circuit
vacated
claim
affirmed
retaliation
finding
theory
retaliation
claims
brought
like
claims
require
showing
retaliation
motivating
factor
adverse
employment
action
cause
see
found
evidence
supported
finding
fitz
motivated
least
part
retaliate
respondent
complaints
levine
held
title
vii
retaliation
claims
must
proved
according
traditional
principles
causation
lessened
causation
test
stated
pp
defining
proper
causation
standard
title
vii
retaliation
claims
presumed
congress
incorporated
tort
law
causation
fact
standard
proof
defendant
conduct
fact
cause
plaintiff
injury
absent
indication
contrary
statute
see
meyer
holley
employee
alleging
discrimination
need
show
causation
suffices
instead
show
motive
discriminate
one
employer
motives
even
employer
also
lawful
motives
decision
principle
result
price
waterhouse
hopkins
ensuing
civil
rights
act
act
substituted
new
framework
one
endorsed
price
waterhouse
relevant
act
added
new
subsection
providing
unlawful
employment
practice
established
complaining
party
demonstrates
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
motivating
factor
employment
practice
even
though
factors
also
motivated
practice
also
relevant
decision
gross
fbl
financial
services
interprets
age
discrimination
employment
act
adea
phrase
age
gross
holds
two
insights
inform
analysis
case
first
textual
concerns
proper
interpretation
term
relates
principles
causation
underlying
second
significance
congress
structural
choices
title
vii
act
pp
title
vii
antiretaliation
provision
appears
different
section
discrimination
ban
like
adea
provision
gross
makes
unlawful
employer
take
adverse
employment
action
employee
certain
criteria
given
lack
meaningful
textual
difference
proper
conclusion
title
vii
retaliation
claims
require
proof
desire
retaliate
cause
challenged
employment
action
respondent
maintain
test
applies
reading
flawed
first
inconsistent
provision
plain
language
addresses
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
discrimination
says
nothing
retaliation
second
reading
inconsistent
statute
design
structure
congress
inserted
provision
subsection
within
deals
discrimination
conclusion
congress
acted
deliberately
omitting
retaliation
claims
reinforced
fact
another
part
act
expressly
refers
unlawful
employment
actions
see
eeoc
arabian
american
oil
third
cases
rely
state
general
proposition
congress
enactment
broadly
phrased
antidiscrimination
statute
may
signal
concomitant
intent
ban
retaliation
individuals
oppose
discrimination
see
cbocs
west
humphries
potter
support
quite
different
rule
every
reference
race
color
creed
sex
nationality
antidiscrimination
statute
treated
synonym
retaliation
especially
precise
complex
exhaustive
statute
like
title
vii
americans
disabilities
act
contains
seven
paragraphs
detailed
description
practices
constituting
prohibited
discrimination
well
express
antiretaliation
provision
passed
year
enactment
shows
congress
elected
address
retaliation
part
detailed
statutory
scheme
clearly
pp
proper
interpretation
implementation
causation
standard
central
importance
fair
responsible
allocation
resources
judicial
litigation
systems
particularly
since
retaliation
claims
made
frequency
lessening
causation
standard
also
contribute
filing
frivolous
claims
siphoning
resources
efforts
employers
agencies
courts
combat
workplace
harassment
pp
respondent
government
argue
view
consistent
longstanding
agency
views
contained
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
guidance
manual
manual
explanations
views
lack
persuasive
force
necessary
precondition
deference
skidmore
swift
respondent
final
argument
control
price
waterhouse
standard
foreclosed
act
amendments
title
vii
displaced
price
waterhouse
framework
pp
vacated
remanded
kennedy
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
thomas
alito
joined
ginsburg
filed
dissenting
opinion
breyer
sotomayor
kagan
joined
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
university
texas
southwestern
medical
center
petitioner
naiel
nassar
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
june
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
law
grants
persons
right
compensation
injury
wrongful
conduct
must
demonstrated
connection
link
injury
sustained
wrong
alleged
requisite
relation
prohibited
conduct
compensable
injury
governed
principles
causation
subject
often
arising
elaborating
law
torts
case
requires
define
rules
context
title
vii
civil
rights
act
et
provides
remedies
employees
injuries
related
discriminatory
conduct
associated
wrongs
employers
title
vii
central
federal
policy
prohibiting
wrongful
discrimination
nation
workplaces
sectors
economic
endeavor
opinion
discusses
causation
rules
two
categories
wrongful
employer
conduct
prohibited
title
vii
first
type
called
purposes
opinion
discrimination
term
used
refer
basic
workplace
protection
prohibitions
employer
discrimination
basis
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
hiring
firing
salary
structure
promotion
like
see
second
type
conduct
employer
retaliation
account
employee
opposed
complained
sought
remedies
unlawful
workplace
discrimination
see
employee
alleges
discrimination
title
vii
need
show
causal
link
injury
wrong
close
injury
occurred
act
causation
test
suffices
instead
show
motive
discriminate
one
employer
motives
even
employer
also
lawful
motives
causative
employer
decision
principle
result
earlier
case
price
waterhouse
hopkins
ensuing
statutory
amendment
congress
codified
part
abrogated
part
holding
price
waterhouse
see
question
must
answer
whether
lessened
causation
standard
applicable
claims
unlawful
employer
retaliation
although
addressed
question
causation
showing
required
establish
liability
title
vii
retaliation
claim
addressed
issue
causation
general
case
involving
employer
discrimination
separate
related
statute
age
discrimination
employment
act
adea
see
gross
fbl
financial
services
gross
concluded
adea
requires
proof
prohibited
criterion
cause
prohibited
conduct
holding
analysis
decision
instructive
petitioner
university
texas
southwestern
medical
center
university
academic
institution
within
university
texas
system
university
specializes
medical
education
aspiring
physicians
health
professionals
scientists
years
university
affiliated
number
healthcare
facilities
including
relevant
case
parkland
memorial
hospital
hospital
provided
affiliation
agreement
university
hospital
permits
university
students
gain
clinical
experience
working
facilities
agreement
also
requires
hospital
offer
empty
staff
physician
posts
university
faculty
members
see
app
accordingly
staff
physician
positions
hospital
filled
faculty
members
respondent
medical
doctor
middle
eastern
descent
specializes
internal
medicine
infectious
diseases
hired
work
member
university
faculty
staff
physician
hospital
left
positions
additional
medical
education
returned
assistant
professor
university
physician
hospital
beth
levine
hired
university
chief
infectious
disease
medicine
position
levine
became
respondent
ultimate
though
direct
superior
respondent
alleged
levine
biased
account
religion
ethnic
heritage
bias
manifested
undeserved
scrutiny
billing
practices
productivity
well
comments
easterners
lazy
different
occasions
employment
respondent
met
gregory
fitz
university
chair
internal
medicine
levine
supervisor
complain
levine
alleged
harassment
despite
obtaining
promotion
levine
assistance
respondent
continued
believe
biased
tried
arrange
continue
working
hospital
without
also
university
faculty
preliminary
negotiations
hospital
suggested
might
possible
respondent
resigned
teaching
post
july
sent
letter
fitz
among
others
stated
reason
departure
harassment
levine
harassment
asserted
religious
racial
cultural
bias
arabs
muslims
reading
letter
fitz
expressed
consternation
respondent
accusations
saying
levine
publicly
humiliated
th
letter
important
publicly
exonerated
app
meanwhile
hospital
offered
respondent
job
staff
physician
indicated
learning
offer
fitz
protested
hospital
asserting
offer
inconsistent
affiliation
agreement
requirement
staff
physicians
also
members
university
faculty
hospital
withdrew
offer
exhausting
administrative
remedies
respondent
filed
title
vii
suit
district
northern
district
texas
alleged
two
discrete
violations
title
vii
first
discrimination
claim
respondent
alleged
levine
racially
religiously
motivated
harassment
resulted
constructive
discharge
university
respondent
second
claim
fitz
efforts
prevent
hospital
hiring
retaliation
complaining
levine
harassment
violation
jury
found
respondent
claims
awarded
backpay
million
compensatory
damages
district
later
reduced
compensatory
damages
award
appeal
appeals
fifth
circuit
affirmed
part
vacated
part
first
concluded
respondent
submitted
insufficient
evidence
support
claim
vacated
portion
jury
verdict
affirmed
retaliation
finding
however
theory
retaliation
claims
brought
like
claims
discrimination
require
showing
retaliation
motivating
factor
adverse
employment
action
rather
cause
see
citing
smith
xerox
held
evidence
supported
finding
fitz
motivated
least
part
retaliate
respondent
complaints
levine
appeals
remanded
redetermination
damages
light
decision
vacate
verdict
four
judges
dissented
decision
rehear
case
en
banc
arguing
circuit
application
standard
retaliation
cases
erroneous
interpretation
title
vii
controlling
caselaw
overruled
en
banc
smith
dissenting
denial
rehearing
en
banc
certiorari
granted
ii
case
requires
define
proper
standard
causation
title
vii
retaliation
claims
causation
fact
proof
defendant
conduct
fact
cause
plaintiff
injury
standard
requirement
tort
claim
see
restatement
torts
definition
legal
cause
comment
comment
intentional
infliction
physical
harm
intentional
torts
negligence
includes
federal
statutory
claims
workplace
discrimination
hazen
paper
biggins
cases
liability
depends
whether
protected
trait
actually
motivated
employer
decision
determinative
influence
outcome
los
angeles
dept
water
power
manhart
explaining
simple
test
determining
discriminatory
employment
practice
whether
evidence
shows
treatment
person
manner
person
sex
different
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
usual
course
standard
requires
plaintiff
show
harm
occurred
absence
defendant
conduct
restatement
torts
comment
negligence
comment
see
comment
intentional
infliction
bodily
harm
intentional
torts
restatement
third
torts
liability
physical
emotional
harm
comment
noting
existence
exception
cases
injured
party
prove
existence
multiple
independently
sufficient
factual
causes
observing
cases
invoking
concept
rare
see
also
restatement
second
torts
negligence
claims
comment
intentional
injury
another
cf
comment
legal
cause
intentional
harm
thus
textbook
tort
law
action
regarded
cause
event
particular
event
occurred
without
keeton
dobbs
keeton
owen
prosser
keeton
law
torts
ed
background
congress
legislated
enacting
title
vii
default
rules
presumed
incorporated
absent
indication
contrary
statute
see
meyer
holley
carey
piphus
since
statute
passage
prohibited
employers
discriminating
employees
seven
specified
criteria
five
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
personal
characteristics
set
forth
noted
outset
discrimination
based
five
characteristics
called
discrimination
opinion
point
great
import
case
two
remaining
categories
wrongful
employer
conduct
employee
opposition
employment
discrimination
employee
submission
support
complaint
alleges
employment
discrimination
wrongs
based
personal
traits
rather
types
protected
employee
conduct
latter
two
categories
covered
separate
subsequent
section
title
vii
discrimination
provision
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
discriminate
individual
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
decision
price
waterhouse
sought
explain
causation
standard
imposed
language
addressed
particular
means
action
taken
individual
race
religion
nationality
although
opinion
case
commanded
majority
six
justices
agree
plaintiff
prevail
claim
discrimination
show
one
prohibited
traits
motivating
substantial
factor
employer
decision
plurality
opinion
white
concurring
judgment
concurring
judgment
plaintiff
made
showing
burden
persuasion
shift
employer
escape
liability
prove
taken
employment
action
absence
discriminatory
animus
plurality
opinion
opinion
white
opinion
words
employer
show
discriminatory
motive
cause
adverse
employment
action
two
years
later
congress
passed
civil
rights
act
act
stat
statute
many
provisions
codified
framework
price
waterhouse
part
also
rejected
substantial
degree
legislation
first
added
new
subsection
end
title
vii
principal
ban
discrimination
see
stat
new
provision
unlawful
employment
practice
established
complaining
party
demonstrates
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
motivating
factor
employment
practice
even
though
factors
also
motivated
practice
course
lessened
causation
standard
act
also
abrogated
portion
price
waterhouse
framework
removing
employer
ability
defeat
liability
plaintiff
proved
existence
impermissible
motivating
factor
see
gross
place
congress
enacted
provides
claim
individual
proves
violation
section
title
employer
demonstrates
taken
action
absence
impermissible
motivating
factor
may
grant
declaratory
relief
injunctive
relief
limited
attorney
fees
costs
ii
shall
award
damages
issue
order
requiring
admission
reinstatement
hiring
promotion
payment
short
act
substituted
new
framework
one
endorsed
price
waterhouse
new
regime
plaintiff
obtain
declaratory
relief
attorney
fees
costs
forms
injunctive
relief
based
solely
proof
race
color
religion
sex
nationality
motivating
factor
employment
action
employer
proof
still
taken
employment
action
save
monetary
damages
reinstatement
order
see
gross
see
also
price
waterhouse
act
considerable
time
elapsed
returned
meaning
problem
causation
time
arose
context
different
yet
similar
statute
adea
see
gross
supra
much
like
title
vii
statute
price
waterhouse
relevant
portion
adea
provided
shall
unlawful
employer
fail
refuse
hire
discharge
individual
otherwise
discriminate
individual
respect
compensation
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
individual
age
quoting
emphasis
ellipsis
original
concentrating
first
foremost
meaning
phrase
age
gross
explained
ordinary
meaning
reason
account
citing
webster
third
new
international
dictionary
oxford
english
dictionary
random
house
dictionary
english
language
emphasis
original
thus
requirement
employer
took
adverse
action
age
meant
age
employer
decided
act
words
age
cause
employer
adverse
decision
see
also
safeco
ins
america
burr
noting
means
based
indicates
causal
relationship
holmes
securities
investor
protection
corporation
equating
reason
cause
course
approving
construction
gross
declined
adopt
interpretation
endorsed
plurality
concurring
opinions
price
waterhouse
noting
adea
must
way
congress
wrote
quoting
meacham
knolls
atomic
power
laboratory
concluded
textual
differences
title
vii
adea
prevent
ed
us
applying
price
waterhouse
federal
age
discrimination
claims
particular
stressed
congressional
choice
add
provision
like
adea
despite
making
numerous
changes
latter
statute
act
citing
eeoc
arabian
american
oil
citing
penn
plaza
llc
pyett
finally
gross
held
proper
read
price
waterhouse
announcing
rule
applied
statutes
despite
similar
wording
enactment
different
reading
necessary
concluded
congress
amendments
title
vii
including
careful
tailoring
factor
claim
substitution
price
waterhouse
full
affirmative
defense
indicated
standard
organic
part
title
vii
thus
read
adea
see
gross
careful
restrict
analysis
statute
withhold
judgment
proper
resolution
case
arose
title
vii
rather
adea
particular
confines
gross
deprive
persuasive
force
indeed
opinion
holds
two
insights
present
case
first
textual
concerns
proper
interpretation
term
relates
principles
causation
underlying
second
significance
congress
structural
choices
title
vii
law
amendments
principles
decide
present
case
inform
analysis
issues
possess
significant
parallels
iii
noted
title
vii
antiretaliation
provision
set
forth
appears
different
section
title
vii
ban
discrimination
antiretaliation
provision
relevant
part
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
discriminate
employees
opposed
practice
made
unlawful
employment
practice
subchapter
made
charge
testified
assisted
participated
manner
investigation
proceeding
hearing
subchapter
enactment
like
statute
issue
gross
makes
unlawful
employer
take
adverse
employment
action
employee
certain
criteria
cf
given
lack
meaningful
textual
difference
text
statute
one
gross
proper
conclusion
gross
title
vii
retaliation
claims
require
proof
desire
retaliate
cause
challenged
employment
action
see
gross
supra
principal
counterargument
offered
respondent
relies
different
understanding
section
face
applies
status
discrimination
discrimination
basis
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
substance
contend
retaliation
defined
statute
unlawful
employment
practice
allows
unlawful
employment
practices
proved
based
showing
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
motivating
factor
necessarily
factor
challenged
employment
action
matter
course
held
retaliation
complaining
race
discrimination
based
race
brief
amicus
curiae
see
brief
respondent
three
main
flaws
reading
first
inconsistent
provision
plain
language
must
acknowledged
title
vii
defines
unlawful
employment
practice
include
retaliation
question
presented
case
different
extended
coverage
unlawful
employment
practices
actually
written
however
text
provision
begins
referring
unlawful
employment
practices
proceeds
address
five
seven
prohibited
discriminatory
actions
actions
based
employee
status
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
indicates
congress
intent
confine
provision
coverage
types
employment
practices
text
says
nothing
retaliation
claims
given
clear
language
improper
conclude
congress
omitted
statute
nevertheless
within
scope
gardner
collins
pet
legislative
intention
derived
words
used
speculate
beyond
reasonable
import
words
see
sebelius
cloer
slip
second
problem
reading
inconsistency
design
structure
statute
whole
see
gross
congress
choice
words
presumed
deliberate
structural
choices
see
congress
wrote
provision
chose
insert
subsection
within
contains
title
vii
ban
discrimination
says
nothing
retaliation
see
act
stat
directing
amended
adding
end
following
new
subsection
title
section
act
created
clarifying
prohibition
impermissible
consideration
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
employment
practices
also
indicates
congress
determined
address
claims
discrimination
retaliation
see
different
portion
act
contains
express
reference
unlawful
employment
actions
thereby
reinforcing
conclusion
congress
acted
deliberately
omitted
retaliation
claims
see
arabian
american
oil
congressional
amendment
adea
similar
subject
coupled
congressional
failure
amend
title
vii
weighs
conclusion
adea
standard
applies
title
vii
see
also
gross
supra
relevant
portion
act
allowed
certain
overseas
operations
employers
engage
practice
prohibited
section
compliance
section
cause
employer
violate
law
foreign
country
workplace
located
stat
congress
desired
make
standard
applicable
title
vii
claims
used
language
similar
invoked
see
arabian
american
oil
supra
inserted
provision
part
section
applies
claims
establishes
rules
remedies
title
vii
enforcement
actions
see
fda
brown
williamson
tobacco
writing
congress
neither
things
must
give
effect
congress
choice
gross
supra
third
problem
respondent
government
reading
standard
submission
decisions
interpreting
federal
antidiscrimination
law
general
matter
treated
bans
discrimination
also
prohibiting
retaliation
support
proposition
respondent
rely
upon
decisions
read
broadly
worded
civil
rights
statute
including
antiretaliation
remedy
cbocs
west
humphries
cbocs
example
held
declares
persons
shall
right
make
enforce
contracts
enjoyed
white
citizens
prohibits
racial
discrimination
also
retaliation
oppose
potter
likewise
read
bar
retaliation
broad
wording
provisions
adea
personnel
actions
affecting
federal
employees
least
years
age
shall
made
free
discrimination
based
age
see
also
jackson
birmingham
bd
title
ix
sullivan
little
hunting
park
decisions
controlling
true
cases
state
general
proposition
congress
enactment
broadly
phrased
antidiscrimination
statute
may
signal
concomitant
intent
ban
retaliation
individuals
oppose
discrimination
even
statute
refer
retaliation
many
words
cases
support
however
quite
different
rule
every
reference
race
color
creed
sex
nationality
antidiscrimination
statute
treated
synonym
retaliation
one
thing
substantive
bar
discrimination
rather
rule
establishes
causation
standard
proving
violation
defined
elsewhere
title
vii
cases
cited
respondent
government
address
rules
sort
precedents
limited
relevance
approach
respondent
government
suggest
inappropriate
context
statute
precise
complex
exhaustive
title
vii
noted
laws
issue
cbocs
jackson
broad
general
bars
discrimination
interpreting
concluded
using
capacious
language
congress
expressed
intent
bar
retaliation
addition
discrimination
see
supra
words
congress
treatment
subject
prohibited
discrimination
broad
brief
omission
specific
discussion
retaliation
unremarkable
title
vii
likewise
phrased
broad
general
terms
respondent
argument
might
force
title
vii
written
makes
incorrect
infer
congress
meant
anything
text
say
subject
retaliation
unlike
title
ix
provisions
adea
title
vii
detailed
statutory
scheme
statute
enumerates
specific
unlawful
employment
practices
see
discrimination
employers
employment
agencies
labor
organizations
training
programs
respectively
discrimination
testing
retaliation
opposing
making
supporting
complaint
unlawful
employment
actions
advertising
preference
applicants
particular
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
defines
key
terms
see
exempts
certain
types
employers
see
creates
administrative
agency
rulemaking
enforcement
authority
see
fundamental
difference
statutory
structure
renders
inapposite
decisions
treated
retaliation
implicit
corollary
discrimination
text
may
divorced
context
light
congress
special
care
drawing
precise
statutory
scheme
improper
indulge
respondent
suggestion
congress
meant
incorporate
default
rules
apply
congress
writes
broad
undifferentiated
statute
see
supra
construing
broadly
worded
provision
adea
refused
draw
inferences
congress
amendments
detailed
provisions
arabian
american
oil
cf
jackson
supra
distinguishing
title
ix
broadly
written
general
prohibition
discrimination
title
vii
greater
detail
respect
conduct
constitutes
discrimination
confirmation
inapplicability
retaliation
claims
may
found
congress
approach
americans
disabilities
act
ada
stat
ada
congress
provided
general
prohibition
discrimination
individual
disability
also
seven
paragraphs
detailed
description
practices
constitute
prohibited
discrimination
see
codified
pertinent
present
purposes
included
express
antiretaliation
provision
see
stat
codified
law
congress
passed
year
enacting
speaks
clear
direct
terms
question
retaliation
rebuts
claim
congress
must
intended
use
phrase
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
textual
equivalent
retaliation
contrary
ada
shows
congress
elected
address
retaliation
part
detailed
statutory
scheme
clear
textual
terms
confronted
similar
structural
dispute
lehman
nakshian
question
whether
provisions
adea
provided
right
claims
federal
government
nakshian
concluding
noted
portion
adea
prohibited
age
discrimination
private
state
local
employers
expressly
provided
jury
trial
whereas
provisions
said
nothing
right
congress
explicit
terms
altered
standard
causation
one
class
claims
another
despite
obvious
opportunity
act
proper
interpretation
implementation
causation
standard
central
importance
fair
responsible
allocation
resources
judicial
litigation
systems
particular
significance
claims
retaliation
made
frequency
number
claims
filed
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
nearly
doubled
past
years
eeoc
charge
statistics
fy
fy
http
visited
june
available
clerk
case
file
indeed
number
retaliation
claims
filed
eeoc
outstripped
every
type
discrimination
except
race
see
ibid
addition
lessening
causation
standard
also
contribute
filing
frivolous
claims
siphon
resources
efforts
employer
administrative
agencies
courts
combat
workplace
harassment
consider
regard
case
employee
knows
fired
poor
performance
given
lower
pay
grade
even
transferred
different
assignment
location
forestall
lawful
action
might
tempted
make
unfounded
charge
racial
sexual
religious
discrimination
unrelated
employment
action
comes
employee
allege
retaliation
respondent
prevail
argument
claim
established
lessened
causation
standard
order
prevent
undesired
change
employment
circumstances
even
employer
escape
judgment
trial
lessened
causation
standard
make
far
difficult
dismiss
dubious
claims
summary
judgment
stage
cf
vance
ball
state
post
inconsistent
structure
operation
title
vii
raise
costs
financial
reputational
employer
whose
actions
fact
result
discriminatory
retaliatory
intent
see
brief
national
school
boards
association
amicus
curiae
yet
significant
risk
consequence
respondent
position
adopted
facts
case
also
demonstrate
legal
factual
distinctions
retaliation
claims
well
importance
correct
standard
proof
respondent
raised
claims
district
alleged
wrongdoer
differed
respondent
discrimination
claim
indirect
supervisor
levine
retaliation
claim
chair
internal
medicine
fitz
proof
required
claim
differed
claim
respondent
required
show
instances
racial
slurs
disparate
treatment
indications
animus
levine
respondent
retaliation
claim
contrast
relied
theory
fitz
committed
exonerating
levine
wished
punish
respondent
besmirching
reputation
separately
instructed
type
claim
jury
returned
separate
verdict
albeit
single
damages
award
appeals
treated
claim
separately
finding
insufficient
evidence
claim
discrimination
proper
apply
standard
respondent
retaliation
claim
university
might
well
subject
liability
account
fitz
alleged
desire
exonerate
levine
even
also
shown
terms
affiliation
agreement
precluded
hospital
hiring
respondent
university
sought
prevent
respondent
hiring
order
honor
agreement
event
result
inconsistent
text
purpose
title
vii
sum
title
vii
defines
term
unlawful
employment
practice
discrimination
basis
seven
prohibited
criteria
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
opposition
employment
discrimination
submitting
supporting
complaint
employment
discrimination
text
mentions
first
five
factors
ones
omits
final
two
deal
retaliation
added
title
vii
congress
inserted
within
section
statute
deals
five
criteria
section
deals
retaliation
claims
one
sections
apply
claims
unlawful
employment
practices
inferred
congressional
intent
prohibit
retaliation
confronted
broadly
worded
antidiscrimination
statutes
title
vii
detailed
structure
makes
inference
inappropriate
based
textual
structural
indications
concludes
follows
title
vii
retaliation
claims
must
proved
according
traditional
principles
causation
lessened
causation
test
stated
requires
proof
unlawful
retaliation
occurred
absence
alleged
wrongful
action
actions
employer
iv
respondent
government
also
argue
applying
provision
lessened
causation
standard
retaliation
claims
consistent
longstanding
agency
views
contained
guidance
manual
published
eeoc
urges
views
entitled
deference
decision
skidmore
swift
see
national
railroad
passenger
corporation
morgan
weight
deference
afforded
agency
interpretations
skidmore
depends
upon
thoroughness
evident
consideration
validity
reasoning
consistency
earlier
later
pronouncements
factors
give
power
persuade
see
vance
post
according
manual
question
causation
element
retaliation
claim
satisfied
credible
direct
evidence
retaliation
motive
challenged
action
regardless
whether
also
vidence
legitimate
motive
eeoc
compliance
manual
pp
mar
noting
division
authority
whether
causation
apply
retaliation
claims
manual
offers
two
rationales
support
adopting
former
standard
first
ourts
long
held
evidentiary
framework
proving
discrimination
also
applies
claims
discrimination
based
retaliation
second
manual
interpretation
permits
proven
retaliation
go
unpunished
undermines
purpose
provisions
maintaining
unfettered
access
statutory
remedial
mechanism
ibid
explanations
lack
persuasive
force
necessary
precondition
deference
skidmore
see
vance
post
first
rationale
settled
judicial
construction
particular
statute
course
relevant
ascertaining
statutory
meaning
see
lorillard
pons
manual
discussion
fails
address
particular
interplay
among
discrimination
provision
antiretaliation
provision
provision
federal
antidiscrimination
statutes
structure
statutory
subsections
control
outcome
issue
manual
failure
address
specific
provisions
statutory
scheme
coupled
generic
nature
discussion
causation
standards
discrimination
retaliation
claims
call
manual
conclusions
serious
question
see
kentucky
retirement
systems
eeoc
manual
second
argument
unpersuasive
reasoning
circular
asserts
lessened
causation
standard
necessary
order
prevent
proven
retaliation
go
ing
unpunished
eeoc
compliance
manual
yet
assumes
answer
central
question
issue
causal
relationship
must
shown
order
prove
retaliation
respondent
final
argument
joined
even
control
outcome
case
standard
applied
price
waterhouse
control
instead
assertion
incorrect
first
position
foreclosed
act
amendments
title
vii
noted
price
waterhouse
adopted
complex
framework
congress
displaced
framework
enacting
adopts
standard
discrimination
claims
replaces
employers
total
defense
remedial
limitation
see
gross
given
careful
balance
lessened
causation
reduced
remedies
congress
struck
act
reason
think
different
balance
articulated
price
waterhouse
somehow
survived
legislation
passage
second
even
argument
still
available
inconsistent
gross
reading
plain
textual
meaning
word
appears
see
gross
supra
reasons
rule
price
waterhouse
controlling
text
structure
history
title
vii
demonstrate
plaintiff
making
retaliation
claim
must
establish
protected
activity
cause
alleged
adverse
action
employer
university
claims
fair
application
standard
demanding
standard
adopted
appeals
entitles
judgment
matter
law
asks
hold
question
however
better
suited
resolution
courts
closer
facts
case
judgment
appeals
fifth
circuit
vacated
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
ginsburg
dissenting
university
texas
southwestern
medical
center
petitioner
naiel
nassar
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
june
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
tice
sotomayor
justice
kagan
join
dissenting
title
vii
civil
rights
act
et
makes
unlawful
employment
practice
discriminate
individual
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
emphasis
added
backing
core
provision
title
vii
also
makes
unlawful
employment
practice
discriminate
individual
individual
complained
opposed
participated
proceeding
prohibited
discrimination
emphasis
added
form
discrimination
commonly
called
retaliation
although
title
vii
use
term
recognized
effective
protection
retaliation
office
essential
securing
workplace
individuals
discriminated
racial
ethnic
religious
status
burlington
white
burlington
northern
fear
retaliation
leading
reason
people
stay
silent
discrimination
encountered
observed
crawford
metropolitan
government
nashville
davidson
internal
quotation
marks
brackets
omitted
similarly
worded
ban
discrimination
ban
retaliation
discrimination
complainant
traveled
together
title
vii
plaintiffs
often
raise
two
provisions
tandem
today
decision
however
drives
wedge
twin
safeguards
cases
establish
discrimination
agree
complaining
party
need
show
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
motivating
factor
employer
adverse
action
employer
proof
factors
also
motivated
action
defeat
discrimination
claim
retaliation
claim
insists
must
meet
stricter
standard
claim
fail
unless
complainant
shows
causation
employer
taken
adverse
employment
action
design
retaliate
reining
retaliation
claims
misapprehends
decisions
teach
retaliation
complaining
discrimination
tightly
bonded
core
prohibition
disassociated
indeed
explained
retaliation
response
complaint
proscribed
discrimination
discrimination
basis
characteristic
congress
sought
immunize
adverse
employment
action
jackson
birmingham
bd
emphasis
added
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
shows
little
regard
trial
judges
obliged
charge
discrete
causation
standards
claim
discrimination
race
coupled
claim
discrimination
individual
complained
race
discrimination
jurors
puzzle
rhyme
reason
dual
standards
graver
concern
seized
provision
adopted
congress
part
endeavor
strengthen
title
vii
turned
measure
reducing
force
ban
retaliation
naiel
nassar
middle
eastern
descent
specialist
treatment
nassar
faculty
member
university
texas
southwestern
medical
center
utsw
save
period
left
employment
continue
education
utsw
affiliated
parkland
hospital
like
faculty
members
university
nassar
also
worked
physician
hospital
beginning
nassar
served
associate
medical
director
hospital
amelia
clinic
phillip
keiser
medical
director
clinic
nassar
principal
supervisor
year
utsw
hired
beth
levine
oversee
clinic
supervise
keiser
levine
commenced
employment
utsw
interviewed
potential
subordinates
meeting
clinic
doctors
minutes
levine
spent
hour
half
nassar
engaging
detailed
review
resume
reading
list
prepared
questions
record
levine
came
board
expressed
concern
keiser
nassar
productivity
questioned
work
ethic
according
keiser
levine
never
seemed
satisf
ied
assurances
nassar
fact
working
harder
physicians
disconcerted
levine
scrutiny
nassar
several
times
complained
levine
supervisor
gregory
fitz
chair
internal
medicine
app
pet
cert
levine
opposed
hiring
another
physician
like
nassar
middle
eastern
descent
keiser
presence
levine
remarked
middle
easterners
lazy
physician
hired
parkland
levine
said
keiser
presence
hospital
hired
another
one
ibid
see
also
record
keiser
presented
levine
objective
data
demonstrating
nassar
high
productivity
levine
began
criticizing
nassar
billing
practices
criticism
take
account
nassar
salary
funded
federal
grant
precluded
billing
services
app
pet
cert
levine
hostility
nassar
sought
way
continue
working
clinic
without
falling
supervision
end
nassar
engaged
discussions
hospital
dropping
affiliation
utsw
retaining
post
parkland
although
initially
told
affiliation
agreement
utsw
parkland
obliged
parkland
fill
staff
physician
posts
utsw
faculty
talks
hospital
continued
eventually
parkland
verbally
offered
nassar
position
staff
physician
see
app
july
nassar
resigned
position
utsw
primary
reason
resignation
nassar
wrote
letter
fitz
continuing
harassment
discrimination
beth
levine
app
pet
cert
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
according
keiser
nassar
letter
shocked
fitz
told
keiser
levine
publicly
humiliated
publicly
exonerated
app
fitz
opposition
parkland
hiring
nassar
prompted
hospital
withdraw
offer
engage
app
pet
cert
accepting
position
smaller
clinic
fresno
california
nassar
filed
complaint
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
agency
found
credibl
testimonial
evidence
utsw
retaliated
nassar
allegations
discrimination
levine
brief
respondent
citing
pl
trial
exh
nassar
filed
suit
district
alleging
utsw
discriminated
violation
title
vii
basis
race
religion
national
origin
see
constructively
discharged
app
pet
cert
complaint
alleged
utsw
retaliated
complaining
levine
behavior
app
pet
cert
retaliation
claim
district
instructed
jury
nassar
prove
retaliation
utsw
motive
prove
utsw
acted
least
part
retaliate
jury
found
utsw
liable
constructive
discharge
retaliation
remedial
phase
judge
charged
jury
award
damages
actions
utsw
prove
preponderance
evidence
taken
even
considered
nassar
protected
activity
finding
utsw
met
proof
burden
jury
awarded
nassar
backpay
compensatory
damages
appeals
fifth
circuit
affirmed
responding
utsw
argument
district
erred
instructing
jury
theory
retaliation
fifth
circuit
held
instruction
conformed
circuit
precedent
citing
smith
xerox
ii
long
acknowledged
symbiotic
relationship
proscriptions
discrimination
proscriptions
retaliation
antidiscrimination
provisions
reasoned
endeavor
create
workplace
individuals
treated
differently
account
race
ethnicity
religion
sex
see
burlington
northern
antiretaliation
provisions
see
secure
primary
objective
preventing
employer
interfering
employee
efforts
secure
advance
enforcement
antidiscrimination
guarantees
ibid
comprehended
title
vii
depends
enforcement
upon
cooperation
employees
willing
file
complaints
act
witnesses
ffective
enforcement
therefore
expected
employees
feel
free
approach
officials
grievances
ibid
quoting
mitchell
robert
demario
jewelry
see
also
crawford
adverting
close
connection
discrimination
retaliation
complaining
discrimination
held
line
decisions
unbroken
today
ban
discrimination
encompasses
retaliation
sullivan
little
hunting
park
determined
provides
citizens
shall
right
enjoyed
white
citizens
inherit
purchase
lease
sell
hold
convey
real
personal
property
protected
white
man
suffered
retaliation
complaining
discrimination
black
tenant
jackson
birmingham
board
education
elaborated
holding
context
sex
discrimination
retaliation
person
complained
sex
discrimination
found
inescapably
evident
another
form
intentional
sex
discrimination
explained
retaliation
definition
intentional
act
form
complainant
subject
differential
treatment
moreover
retaliation
discrimination
basis
sex
intentional
response
nature
complaint
allegation
sex
discrimination
citations
omitted
jackson
interpreted
title
ix
educational
amendments
noting
legislation
followed
three
years
sullivan
found
appropriate
also
realistic
presume
congress
thoroughly
familiar
sullivan
expected
enactment
title
ix
interpreted
conformity
internal
quotation
marks
alterations
omitted
potter
similarly
reasoned
held
provision
age
discrimination
employment
act
adea
barring
discrimination
based
age
also
proscribes
retaliation
jackson
said
relationship
sullivan
enactment
title
ix
observed
said
well
relationship
sullivan
enactment
adea
provision
see
also
cbocs
west
humphries
retaliation
race
discrimination
constitutes
discrimination
based
race
sound
reason
case
stray
decisions
sullivan
jackson
cbocs
west
iii
title
vii
provision
key
unlawful
employment
practice
established
complaining
party
demonstrates
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
motivating
factor
employment
practice
even
though
factors
also
motivated
practice
section
enacted
part
civil
rights
act
amended
title
vii
along
federal
antidiscrimination
statutes
see
stat
amendments
intended
provide
additional
protections
unlawful
discrimination
employment
respon
number
decisions
sharply
cut
back
scope
effectiveness
antidiscrimination
laws
pt
ii
pp
hereinafter
house
report
part
ii
citing
inter
alia
patterson
mclean
credit
union
martin
wilks
lorance
technologies
among
decisions
found
inadequately
protective
price
waterhouse
hopkins
plurality
case
held
words
encompass
claims
challenging
employment
decision
attributable
mixed
motives
one
motivated
legitimate
illegitimate
factors
see
title
vii
plaintiff
plurality
concluded
need
show
prohibited
factor
contributed
employment
decision
sole
cause
see
kennedy
dissenting
employer
liable
however
show
preponderance
evidence
taken
action
absent
illegitimate
motive
congress
endorsed
plurality
conclusion
actionable
title
vii
discrimination
must
motivating
factor
need
cause
adverse
employment
action
see
house
report
part
ii
congress
disagreed
however
insofar
price
waterhouse
decision
allowed
employer
escape
liability
showing
action
taken
regardless
improper
motive
house
report
part
ii
see
also
pt
pp
hereinafter
house
report
part
title
vii
ban
discrimination
employment
meaningful
house
report
explained
victims
intentional
discrimination
must
able
obtain
relief
perpetrators
discrimination
must
held
liable
actions
house
report
part
ii
superseding
price
waterhouse
part
congress
sought
restore
rule
decision
followed
several
circuits
discrimination
actually
shown
play
role
contested
employment
decision
may
subject
liability
house
report
part
ii
see
also
house
report
part
end
congress
enacted
latter
provides
employer
proof
adverse
employment
action
taken
event
shield
employer
liability
proof
however
limits
plaintiff
remedies
declaratory
injunctive
relief
attorney
fees
costs
critically
rule
congress
intended
restore
limited
substantive
discrimination
house
report
explained
committee
endors
ed
decisional
law
bibbs
block
en
banc
held
violation
title
vii
established
trier
fact
determines
unlawful
motive
played
part
employment
decision
decisional
process
see
house
report
part
prior
civil
rights
act
bibbs
applied
retaliation
claims
see
johnson
legal
servs
arkansas
find
retaliation
played
invidious
part
plaintiff
termination
violation
title
vii
established
see
also
eeoc
general
lines
scant
reason
think
despite
congress
aim
restore
strengthen
laws
ban
discrimination
employment
house
report
part
ii
congress
meant
exclude
retaliation
claims
newly
enacted
motivating
factor
provision
section
provides
unlawful
employment
practice
established
plaintiff
shows
protected
characteristic
factor
driving
employment
practice
title
vii
explicitly
denominates
retaliation
like
discrimination
unlawful
employment
practice
employment
practice
necessarily
encompasses
practices
prohibited
plain
terms
covers
retaliation
notably
enacted
congress
tie
new
provision
specifically
proscribe
discrimination
race
color
religion
gender
national
origin
rather
congress
added
entirely
new
provision
codify
causation
standard
one
encompassing
employment
practice
also
telling
limited
situations
complainant
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
motivates
employer
action
contrast
title
vii
substantive
antidiscrimination
provisions
refer
protected
characteristics
complaining
party
see
referring
individual
protected
characteristics
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
congress
thus
knew
limit
title
vii
coverage
victims
discrimination
minded
chose
instead
bring
within
employment
practice
cut
retaliation
scope
one
must
blind
choice
cf
jackson
omission
reference
complaining
party
sex
title
ix
supports
conclusion
statute
protects
male
plaintiff
retaliation
response
complaints
sex
discrimination
women
inception
agency
entrusted
interpretation
title
vii
superintendence
act
administration
eeoc
see
understood
provision
cover
retaliation
claims
shortly
congress
amended
title
vii
include
provision
eeoc
issued
guidance
advising
lthough
specify
retaliation
basis
finding
liability
whenever
motivating
factor
action
neither
suggest
basis
deviating
commission
rule
find
liability
whenever
retaliation
plays
role
employment
decision
eeoc
revised
enforcement
guidance
recent
developments
disparate
treatment
theory
july
hereinafter
eeoc
guidance
available
http
visited
june
clerk
case
file
eeoc
initial
guidance
explained
retaliation
go
unremedied
chilling
effect
upon
willingness
individuals
speak
employment
discrimination
ibid
compliance
manual
eeoc
elaborated
conclusion
applies
retaliation
eeoc
compliance
manual
may
hereinafter
eeoc
compliance
manual
reading
agency
observed
tracked
view
widely
held
courts
evidentiary
framework
proving
employment
discrimination
based
race
sex
protected
class
status
also
applies
claims
discrimination
based
retaliation
ibid
interpretation
permit
ted
proven
retaliation
go
unpunished
eeoc
noted
undermin
purpose
provisions
maintaining
unfettered
access
statutory
remedial
mechanism
ibid
position
set
eeoc
guidance
compliance
manual
merits
respect
see
skidmore
swift
federal
express
holowecki
eeoc
policy
statements
embodied
compliance
manual
internal
directives
reflect
body
experience
informed
judgment
entitled
measure
respect
less
deferential
skidmore
standard
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
breadth
deemed
ambiguous
although
believe
meaning
plain
provision
construed
accord
eeoc
longstanding
guidance
iv
draws
opposite
conclusion
ruling
retaliation
falls
outside
scope
holding
ascribes
congress
unlikely
purpose
separating
retaliation
claims
discrimination
claims
thereby
undermining
legislature
effort
fortify
protections
title
vii
none
reasons
offers
support
restrictive
interpretation
survives
inspection
first
asserts
reading
encompass
claims
retaliation
inconsistent
provision
plain
language
ante
acknowledges
however
text
provision
begins
referring
unlawful
employment
practices
term
undeniably
includes
retaliation
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
nevermind
continues
goes
reference
motivating
factor
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
thus
sees
retaliation
protected
activity
entirely
discrete
discrimination
ibid
vision
retaliation
separate
concept
runs
precedent
see
supra
today
clear
eyed
retaliation
manifestation
discrimination
jackson
explained
context
sex
discrimination
retaliation
discrimination
basis
sex
intentional
response
nature
complaint
allegation
sex
discrimination
take
issue
jackson
insight
instead
distinguishes
jackson
like
cases
ground
concerned
laws
congress
treatment
subject
prohibited
discrimination
broad
brief
ante
title
vii
contrast
detailed
statutory
scheme
enumerates
specific
unlawful
employment
practices
defines
key
terms
exempts
certain
types
employers
ante
accordingly
says
improper
indulge
suggestion
congress
meant
incorporate
title
vii
default
rules
apply
congress
writes
broad
undifferentiated
statute
ibid
strange
logic
indeed
conclude
congress
homed
retaliation
codified
proscription
title
vii
congress
meant
protection
unlawful
employment
practice
less
force
protection
available
statute
mention
retaliation
hardly
surprising
jurisprudence
support
conclusion
construed
provision
adea
proscribes
discrimination
based
age
bar
retaliation
mindful
another
part
act
provision
applicable
employees
explicitly
proscribes
retaliation
moreover
set
specific
list
forbidden
employer
practices
citing
suggests
la
issue
broad
general
ba
discrimination
ante
opinion
case
observes
adea
provisions
brief
broad
general
others
extensive
specific
detailed
title
vii
see
ibid
adea
provision
patterned
directly
title
vii
discrimination
ban
contains
broad
prohibition
rather
list
specific
prohibited
practices
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
makes
little
sense
apply
different
mode
analysis
title
vii
adea
brief
statements
discrimination
context
larger
statutory
reliance
civil
rights
act
stat
americans
disabilities
act
ada
stat
similarly
unavailing
according
congress
explicit
reference
reinforc
es
conclusion
congress
acted
deliberately
omitted
retaliation
claims
ante
true
ada
says
congress
provided
general
prohibition
discrimination
individual
disability
also
seven
paragraphs
detailed
description
practices
constitute
prohibited
discrimination
nd
express
antiretaliation
provision
ante
argument
underwhelming
yes
congress
sometimes
addressed
retaliation
explicitly
antidiscrimination
statutes
occasion
interpretation
congress
simply
targets
discrimination
protected
characteristics
refers
employment
practices
motivated
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
courts
comprehend
phrases
read
informed
consistent
holdings
phrases
draw
retaliation
truth
retaliation
form
intentional
discrimination
see
jackson
described
supra
point
prior
instance
antidiscrimination
law
found
cover
retaliation
particularly
imprudent
context
provision
added
part
congress
effort
toughen
protections
workplace
discrimination
also
disassociates
retaliation
discrimination
stressing
bar
latter
appears
proscription
retaliation
appears
separate
provision
section
asserts
contains
title
vii
ban
discrimination
says
nothing
retaliation
ante
retaliation
therefore
concludes
read
ante
reasoning
rests
false
premise
section
deal
exclusively
discrimination
based
protected
characteristics
provisions
stated
deal
variety
matters
unquestionably
covering
retaliation
example
enacted
tandem
located
immediately
limits
opportunities
collaterally
attack
employment
practices
installed
implement
consent
judgment
section
applies
beyond
substantive
antidiscrimination
provisions
indeed
applies
beyond
title
vii
encompass
claims
constitution
federal
civil
rights
laws
thus
employee
sues
retaliatory
discharge
violation
consent
judgment
orders
reinstatement
person
adversely
affected
judgment
employee
loses
seniority
result
generally
barred
attacking
judgment
given
actual
notice
proposed
order
reasonable
opportunity
present
objections
congress
placed
provision
moment
text
provision
plainly
conveys
reach
consent
judgments
settling
complaints
retaliation
cover
consent
judgments
settling
complaints
discrimination
section
similarly
illustrative
provision
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
discharge
individual
fails
fulfill
requirement
imposed
interest
national
security
renders
retaliation
unlawful
employment
practice
exemption
doubt
apply
title
vii
retaliatory
discharge
claim
given
provisions
congress
placement
provision
within
bear
weight
places
gives
deference
eeoc
longstanding
position
applies
retaliation
charges
agency
address
particular
interplay
among
antidiscrimination
provision
antiretaliation
provision
provision
ante
compliance
manual
eeoc
noted
courts
concluded
cover
retaliation
citing
example
woodson
scott
paper
decision
third
circuit
acknowledged
given
pause
fact
courts
generally
borrowed
discrimination
law
determining
burdens
order
proof
retaliation
cases
one
therefore
say
third
circuit
continued
congress
knew
practice
borrowing
retaliation
cases
presumed
courts
continue
practice
act
ibid
woodson
rejected
argument
eeoc
found
sound
see
eeoc
compliance
manual
courts
long
held
evidentiary
framework
proving
employment
discrimination
based
race
sex
protected
class
status
also
applies
claims
discrimination
based
see
also
eeoc
guidance
explicitly
refer
retaliation
nothing
provision
calls
deviation
longstanding
practice
finding
liability
plaintiff
demonstrates
retaliatory
intent
motivated
adverse
employment
decision
adverting
woodson
eeoc
made
clear
considered
argument
relies
today
putting
agency
appraisal
generic
ante
thus
conspicuously
unfair
comment
second
reason
refusing
accord
deference
eeoc
fares
better
eeoc
conclusion
lessened
causation
standard
necessary
order
prevent
retaliation
ing
unpunished
reasons
circular
assumes
answer
central
question
issue
causal
relationship
must
shown
order
prove
retaliation
ibid
reasoning
wash
test
set
plaintiff
prevails
shows
proscribed
conduct
motivating
factor
adverse
employment
action
encountered
even
though
factors
also
motivated
action
succeed
although
relief
entitled
may
restricted
see
supra
view
proof
retaliation
factor
motivating
adverse
employment
action
insufficient
establish
liability
causation
standard
mean
plaintiff
failed
prove
subjected
unlawful
retaliation
mean
however
proof
retaliatory
motive
alone
yields
victory
plaintiff
put
otherwise
view
permits
proven
retaliation
go
unpunished
eeoc
recognized
see
eeoc
compliance
manual
narrowed
exclude
retaliation
claims
turns
gross
fbl
financial
services
answer
question
presented
whether
plaintiff
must
demonstrate
causation
establish
liability
held
gross
contrast
title
vii
adea
authorize
age
discrimination
claim
asserting
mixed
motives
explaining
uniform
interpretation
two
statutes
sometimes
unwarranted
noted
gross
phrase
age
read
bar
discrimination
people
ages
even
though
previously
interpreted
race
sex
title
vii
bar
discrimination
people
races
sexes
yet
gross
took
pains
distinguish
adea
claims
title
vii
claims
invoked
today
pathmarking
see
ante
holding
analysis
gross
instructive
word
title
vii
retaliation
provision
tells
us
interpreted
accord
interpretation
word
companion
discrimination
provision
title
vii
instead
statutory
lines
crossed
meaning
title
vii
retaliation
provision
read
mean
held
means
purposes
see
gross
conducting
statutory
interpretation
careful
apply
rules
applicable
one
statute
different
statute
without
careful
critical
examination
quoting
holowecki
words
employer
prevailed
gross
according
adea
antidiscrimination
prescription
like
title
vii
employer
prevails
nassar
case
meaningful
textual
difference
ante
adea
use
use
word
title
vii
retaliation
provision
sense
one
make
heads
employer
wins
tails
employee
loses
standard
principle
statutory
interpretation
identical
phrases
appearing
statute
title
vii
ordinarily
bear
consistent
meaning
see
powerex
reliant
energy
services
following
principle
title
vii
retaliation
provision
like
discrimination
provision
permit
claims
causation
standard
apply
provisions
decision
construe
require
causation
line
gross
even
confounding
light
price
waterhouse
recall
price
waterhouse
interpreted
permit
claims
see
supra
today
rejects
proposition
cover
retaliation
claims
governed
price
house
framework
plaintiff
shows
discrimination
motivating
factor
adverse
employment
action
defendant
may
escape
liability
showing
taken
action
illegitimate
motive
wrong
revert
price
waterhouse
says
civil
rights
act
amendments
title
vii
abrogated
decision
conclusion
defies
logic
amendments
several
courts
applied
price
waterhouse
framework
retaliation
view
congress
designed
standard
exclude
retaliation
claims
also
override
sub
silentio
circuit
precedent
applying
price
waterhouse
framework
claims
congress
replace
price
waterhouse
framework
causation
requirement
gross
applied
adea
years
amendments
title
vii
shut
sight
legislative
record
replete
statements
evincing
congress
intent
strengthen
antidiscrimination
laws
thereby
hold
employers
accountable
prohibited
discrimination
see
civil
rights
act
stat
house
report
part
ii
odd
mode
statutory
interpretation
divines
congress
aim
looking
decision
gross
made
different
statute
ignoring
overarching
purpose
congress
enacted
civil
rights
act
see
supra
shows
little
regard
trial
judges
must
instruct
juries
title
vii
cases
plaintiffs
allege
discrimination
retaliation
concerned
capacity
jurors
follow
instructions
conforming
today
decision
causation
complicated
concept
convey
juries
best
circumstances
asking
jurors
determine
liability
based
different
standards
single
case
virtually
certain
sow
confusion
tolerable
governing
statute
required
double
standards
reasons
already
stated
vi
assertion
cause
requirement
adopts
necessarily
follows
use
word
fails
convince
contrary
suggestion
see
ante
word
inevitably
demand
causation
exclusion
causation
formulations
one
factor
contributes
plaintiff
injury
causation
problematic
see
restatement
third
torts
comment
noting
near
universal
agreement
standard
inappropriate
multiple
sufficient
causes
exist
hereinafter
restatement
third
restatement
torts
comment
legal
cause
cause
substantial
factor
bringing
harm
event
overdetermined
two
forces
create
injury
alone
sufficient
cause
modern
tort
law
permits
plaintiff
prevail
upon
showing
either
sufficient
condition
created
harm
restatement
third
contrast
approach
erroneously
calls
textbook
tort
law
ante
title
vii
plaintiff
alleging
retaliation
establish
liability
firing
prompted
legitimate
illegitimate
factors
ante
today
opinion
rehashes
arguments
rightly
rejected
price
waterhouse
concurring
judgment
case
justice
recognized
disconnect
standard
dissent
advocated
imposed
plaintiff
burden
showing
causation
see
kennedy
dissenting
doctrines
dissent
relied
justice
explained
area
tort
liability
whence
dissent
standard
causation
derived
law
long
recognized
certain
cases
leaving
burden
persuasion
plaintiff
prove
causation
unfair
destructive
deterrent
purposes
embodied
concept
duty
care
thus
multiple
causation
cases
breach
duty
established
common
law
torts
long
shifted
burden
proof
defendants
prove
negligent
actions
cause
plaintiff
injury
concurring
judgment
citing
summers
tice
cal
justice
brennan
plurality
opinion
even
less
solicitous
dissent
approach
noting
standard
embraced
dissent
price
waterhouse
neither
two
sufficient
forces
constitute
cause
even
either
one
alone
led
injury
plurality
remarked
need
leave
common
sense
doorstep
interpret
statute
plurality
concurring
opinions
price
waterhouse
indicate
strict
test
particularly
ill
suited
employment
discrimination
cases
even
test
appropriate
tort
contexts
entirely
different
matter
determine
relation
consider
ing
physical
forces
characteristics
constitute
motive
gross
breyer
dissenting
assessing
employer
multiple
motives
apply
causation
engage
hypothetical
inquiry
happened
employer
thoughts
circumstances
different
see
also
price
waterhouse
opinion
times
test
demands
impossible
challenges
imagination
trier
probe
purely
fanciful
unknowable
state
affairs
quoting
malone
ruminations
stan
rev
point
lost
lost
congress
title
vii
enacted
congress
considered
rejected
amendment
placed
word
solely
complainant
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
see
cong
rec
senator
case
prime
sponsor
title
vii
commented
sole
cause
standard
render
act
totally
nugatory
life
shape
way
senator
suggested
commenting
anyone
ever
action
motivated
single
cause
different
kind
animal
know
ibid
holds
odds
solid
line
decisions
recognizing
retaliation
inextricably
bound
discrimination
excludes
retaliation
claims
reaches
outside
title
vii
arrive
interpretation
lacks
sensitivity
realities
life
work
endeavor
guided
neither
precedent
aims
legislators
formulated
amended
title
vii
indeed
appears
driven
zeal
reduce
number
retaliation
claims
filed
employers
see
ante
congress
goal
mind
added
title
vii
see
house
report
part
ii
today
misguided
judgment
along
judgment
vance
ball
state
post
prompt
yet
another
civil
rights
restoration
act
reasons
stated
affirm
judgment
fifth
circuit
footnotes
district
reduced
compensatory
damages
statutory
cap
title
vii
see
appeals
found
evidence
insufficient
support
claim
constructive
discharge
reversed
district
judgment
extent
see
app
pet
cert
ruling
contested
fifth
circuit
since
reversed
course
unpublished
opinion
concluding
prescription
apply
retaliation
claims
see
carter
luminant
power
servs
wl
apr
justices
white
separately
concurred
required
title
vii
plaintiff
show
protected
characteristics
constituted
substantial
motivating
factor
adverse
employment
decision
see
price
waterhouse
hopkins
white
concurring
judgment
concurring
judgment
obscures
inconsistency
today
opinion
comparing
title
vii
see
ante
unlike
title
ix
provisions
adea
title
vii
detailed
statutory
comparison
inapt
like
title
vii
adea
detailed
statutory
scheme
ibid
compare
ibid
citing
title
vii
provisions
proscribe
discrimination
employers
employment
agencies
labor
organizations
training
programs
bar
retaliation
prohibit
advertising
preference
certain
protected
characteristics
define
terms
exempt
certain
employers
create
agency
rulemaking
enforcement
authority
proscribing
age
discrimination
employers
employment
agencies
labor
unions
barring
retaliation
prohibiting
advertising
preference
employees
particular
age
granting
rulemaking
authority
eeoc
defining
terms
thus
like
relevant
respect
single
provisions
comprised
within
detailed
scheme
codified
provides
shall
unlawful
employer
take
action
otherwise
prohibited
section
respect
employee
workplace
foreign
country
compliance
section
cause
employer
violate
law
foreign
country
workplace
located
provision
framed
accord
decision
eeoc
arabian
american
oil
assertion
confronted
similar
structural
dispute
lehman
nakshian
ante
assumes
conclusion
explains
nakshian
plaintiff
argued
adea
afforded
right
trial
jury
amendment
provision
codified
granted
right
plaintiffs
suing
private
employers
well
state
local
governmental
entities
one
argued
nakshian
amendment
applied
provision
hence
nakshian
holding
adea
permit
plaintiff
try
case
jury
relevant
correct
cover
retaliation
claims
see
vislisel
turnage
carter
south
central
bell
williams
mallinckrodt
table