mary
honor
ctr
hicks
argued
april
decided
june
petitioner
halfway
house
employed
respondent
hicks
correctional
officer
later
shift
commander
demoted
ultimately
discharged
hicks
filed
suit
alleging
actions
taken
race
violation
inter
alia
title
vii
civil
rights
act
adhering
allocation
burden
production
order
presentation
proof
title
vii
discriminatory
treatment
cases
established
mcdonnell
douglas
green
district
found
hicks
established
preponderance
evidence
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
petitioners
rebutted
presumption
introducing
evidence
two
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reasons
actions
petitioners
reasons
pretextual
nonetheless
held
hicks
failed
carry
ultimate
burden
proving
adverse
actions
racially
motivated
setting
aside
determination
appeals
held
hicks
entitled
judgment
matter
law
proved
petitioners
proffered
reasons
pretextual
held
trier
fact
rejection
employer
asserted
reasons
actions
entitle
plaintiff
judgment
matter
law
pp
mcdonnell
douglas
hicks
established
preponderance
evidence
prima
facie
case
discrimination
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdine
presumption
arose
petitioners
unlawfully
discriminated
requiring
judgment
favor
unless
petitioners
came
forward
explanation
presumption
placed
upon
petitioners
burden
producing
evidence
adverse
actions
taken
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reasons
believed
trier
fact
support
finding
unlawful
discrimination
cause
actions
however
case
presumptions
see
evid
ultimate
burden
persuasion
remained
times
hicks
appeals
erred
concluded
trier
fact
disbelief
petitioners
proffered
reasons
placed
petitioners
position
remained
silent
face
hicks
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
petitioners
production
evidence
nondiscriminatory
reasons
whether
ultimately
persuasive
satisfied
burden
production
rebutted
presumption
intentional
discrimination
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
became
irrelevant
trier
fact
required
decide
ultimate
question
fact
whether
hicks
proven
petitioners
intentionally
discriminated
race
compelling
judgment
hicks
disregard
fundamental
principle
rule
presumption
shift
burden
proof
ignore
admonition
title
vii
plaintiff
times
bears
ultimate
burden
persuasion
pp
authority
impose
liability
upon
employer
alleged
discriminatory
employment
practices
unless
factfinder
determines
employer
unlawfully
discriminated
may
substitute
required
finding
much
different
much
lesser
finding
employer
explanation
action
believable
doubt
created
dictum
burdine
falsity
employer
explanation
alone
enough
sustain
plaintiff
case
eliminated
postal
service
bd
governors
aikens
pp
concerns
dissent
respondent
decision
produce
dire
practical
consequences
unfounded
pp
scalia
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
kennedy
thomas
joined
souter
filed
dissenting
opinion
white
blackmun
stevens
joined
post
gary
gardner
assistant
attorney
general
missouri
argued
cause
petitioners
brief
jeremiah
nixon
attorney
general
downing
deputy
attorney
general
charles
oldham
argued
cause
respondent
brief
elaine
jones
charles
stephen
ralston
eric
schnapper
louis
gilden
edward
dumont
argued
cause
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
brief
acting
solicitor
general
bryson
acting
assistant
attorney
general
turner
edwin
kneedler
david
flynn
rebecca
troth
donald
livingston
gwendolyn
young
reams
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
chamber
commerce
america
stephen
bokat
robin
conrad
mona
zeiberg
equal
employment
advisory
council
robert
williams
douglas
mcdowell
national
association
manufacturers
glen
nager
jan
amundson
washington
legal
foundation
et
al
daniel
popeo
richard
samp
hugh
joseph
beard
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
lawyer
committee
civil
rights
law
et
al
herbert
wachtell
william
brown
iii
norman
redlich
thomas
henderson
richard
seymour
colleen
mcmahon
melissa
rosse
isabelle
katz
pinzler
steven
shapiro
donna
lenhoff
cathy
antonia
hernandez
richard
larson
national
employment
lawyers
association
janette
johnson
justice
scalia
delivered
opinion
granted
certiorari
determine
whether
suit
employer
alleging
intentional
racial
discrimination
violation
title
vii
civil
rights
act
stat
trier
fact
rejection
employer
asserted
reasons
actions
mandates
finding
plaintiff
petitioner
mary
honor
center
mary
halfway
house
operated
missouri
department
corrections
human
resources
mdchr
respondent
melvin
hicks
black
man
hired
correctional
officer
mary
august
promoted
shift
commander
one
six
supervisory
positions
february
mdchr
conducted
investigation
administration
mary
resulted
extensive
supervisory
changes
january
respondent
retained
position
john
powell
became
new
chief
custody
respondent
immediate
supervisor
petitioner
steve
long
new
superintendent
prior
personnel
changes
respondent
enjoyed
satisfactory
employment
record
soon
thereafter
became
subject
repeated
increasingly
severe
disciplinary
actions
suspended
five
days
violations
institutional
rules
subordinates
march
received
letter
reprimand
alleged
failure
conduct
adequate
investigation
brawl
inmates
occurred
shift
march
later
demoted
shift
commander
correctional
officer
failure
ensure
subordinates
entered
use
mary
vehicle
official
log
book
march
finally
june
discharged
threatening
powell
exchange
heated
words
april
respondent
brought
suit
district
eastern
district
missouri
alleging
petitioner
mary
violated
title
vii
civil
rights
act
petitioner
long
violated
demoting
discharging
race
full
bench
trial
district
found
petitioners
ed
mo
appeals
eighth
circuit
reversed
remanded
granted
certiorari
ii
section
title
vii
civil
rights
act
provides
relevant
part
shall
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
discharge
individual
otherwise
discriminate
individual
respect
compensation
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
individual
race
mcdonnell
douglas
scheme
stablishment
prima
facie
case
effect
creates
presumption
employer
unlawfully
discriminated
employee
burdine
supra
establish
presumption
say
finding
predicate
fact
prima
facie
case
produces
required
conclusion
absence
explanation
finding
unlawful
discrimination
louisell
mueller
federal
evidence
thus
mcdonnell
douglas
presumption
places
upon
defendant
burden
producing
explanation
rebut
prima
facie
case
burden
producing
evidence
adverse
employment
actions
taken
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reason
burdine
defendant
must
clearly
set
forth
introduction
admissible
evidence
reasons
actions
believed
trier
fact
support
finding
unlawful
discrimination
cause
employment
action
important
note
however
although
mcdonnell
douglas
presumption
shifts
burden
production
defendant
ultimate
burden
persuading
trier
fact
defendant
intentionally
discriminated
plaintiff
remains
times
plaintiff
regard
operates
like
presumptions
described
federal
rule
evidence
civil
actions
proceedings
otherwise
provided
act
congress
rules
presumption
imposes
party
directed
burden
going
forward
evidence
rebut
meet
presumption
shift
party
burden
proof
sense
risk
nonpersuasion
remains
throughout
trial
upon
party
originally
cast
district
acting
trier
fact
bench
trial
found
reasons
petitioners
gave
real
reasons
respondent
demotion
discharge
found
respondent
supervisor
disciplined
violations
committed
subordinates
similar
even
serious
violations
committed
respondent
either
disregarded
treated
leniently
powell
manufactured
final
verbal
confrontation
order
provoke
respondent
threatening
nonetheless
held
respondent
failed
carry
ultimate
burden
proving
race
determining
factor
petitioners
decision
first
demote
dismiss
short
district
concluded
although
respondent
proven
existence
crusade
terminate
proven
crusade
racially
rather
personally
motivated
appeals
set
determination
aside
ground
nce
respondent
proved
petitioners
proffered
reasons
adverse
employment
actions
pretextual
respondent
entitled
judgment
matter
law
appeals
reasoned
defendants
proffered
reasons
discredited
defendants
position
offered
legitimate
reason
actions
words
defendants
better
position
remained
silent
offering
rebuttal
established
inference
unlawfully
discriminated
plaintiff
basis
race
ibid
nature
things
determination
defendant
met
burden
production
thus
rebutted
legal
presumption
intentional
discrimination
involve
credibility
assessment
determination
necessarily
precedes
stage
close
defendant
case
asked
decide
whether
issue
fact
remains
trier
fact
determine
none
evidence
presented
rational
person
find
existence
facts
constituting
prima
facie
case
defendant
failed
meet
burden
production
failed
introduce
evidence
taken
true
permit
conclusion
nondiscriminatory
reason
adverse
action
event
must
award
judgment
plaintiff
matter
law
federal
rule
civil
procedure
case
jury
trials
federal
rule
civil
procedure
case
bench
trials
see
james
hazard
civil
procedure
ed
louisell
mueller
federal
evidence
defendant
failed
sustain
burden
reasonable
minds
differ
whether
preponderance
evidence
establishes
facts
prima
facie
case
question
fact
remain
trier
fact
called
upon
answer
hand
defendant
succeeded
carrying
burden
production
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
presumptions
burdens
longer
relevant
resurrect
later
trier
fact
determined
produced
meet
burden
production
credible
flies
face
holding
burdine
rebut
presumption
defendant
need
persuade
actually
motivated
proffered
reasons
presumption
fulfilled
role
forcing
defendant
come
forward
response
simply
drops
picture
defendant
production
whatever
persuasive
effect
made
trier
fact
proceeds
decide
ultimate
question
whether
plaintiff
proven
defendant
intentionally
discriminated
race
factfinder
disbelief
reasons
put
forward
defendant
particularly
disbelief
accompanied
suspicion
mendacity
may
together
elements
prima
facie
case
suffice
show
intentional
discrimination
thus
rejection
defendant
proffered
reasons
permit
trier
fact
infer
ultimate
fact
intentional
discrimination
appeals
correct
noted
upon
rejection
additional
proof
discrimination
required
emphasis
added
appeals
holding
rejection
defendant
proffered
reasons
compels
judgment
plaintiff
disregards
fundamental
principle
rule
presumption
shift
burden
proof
ignores
repeated
admonition
title
vii
plaintiff
times
bears
ultimate
burden
persuasion
see
postal
service
bd
governors
aikens
citing
burdine
supra
patterson
mclean
credit
union
price
waterhouse
hopkins
plurality
opinion
brennan
joined
marshall
blackmun
stevens
jj
white
concurring
judgment
concurring
judgment
kennedy
joined
chief
justice
scalia
dissenting
cooper
federal
reserve
bank
richmond
cf
wards
cove
packing
atonio
stevens
dissenting
watson
fort
worth
bank
trust
iii
one
unfamiliar
case
law
upset
dissent
alarm
today
setting
aside
settled
precedent
post
two
decades
stable
law
framework
carefully
crafted
precedents
old
years
post
congress
aware
implicitly
approved
post
panic
certainly
break
among
courts
appeals
whose
divergent
views
concerning
nature
supposedly
stable
law
precisely
prompted
us
take
case
divergence
dissent
version
settled
precedent
remotely
considered
prevailing
view
compare
eeoc
flasher
finding
pretext
mandate
finding
illegal
discrimination
galbraith
northern
telecom
opinion
boggs
cert
denied
opinion
guy
concurring
result
samuels
raytheon
holder
city
raleigh
benzies
illinois
dept
mental
health
developmental
disabilities
dictum
cert
denied
clark
huntsville
city
bd
dictum
hicks
mary
honor
center
case
finding
pretext
mandates
finding
illegal
discrimination
cert
granted
tye
board
ed
polaris
joint
vocational
school
cert
denied
king
palmer
app
duffy
wheeling
pittsburgh
steel
cert
denied
lopez
metropolitan
life
ins
dictum
cert
denied
elsea
dictum
thornbrough
columbus
greenville
dictum
mean
answer
dissent
accusations
detail
examining
cases
outset
worth
noting
utter
implausibility
ever
held
dissent
says
held
described
title
vii
renders
unlawful
employer
fail
refuse
hire
discharge
individual
otherwise
discriminate
individual
respect
compensation
terms
conditions
privileges
employment
individual
race
color
religion
sex
national
origin
context
jury
trials
title
vii
causes
action
dissent
asserts
held
proper
assessment
liability
violation
law
assume
business
work
force
members
particular
minority
group
group
comprises
relevant
labor
market
applicant
member
group
applies
opening
minimally
qualified
rejected
hiring
officer
minority
group
search
fill
opening
continues
rejected
applicant
files
suit
racial
discrimination
title
vii
suit
comes
trial
supervisor
conducted
company
hiring
fired
mcdonnell
douglas
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
see
dissent
interpretation
law
must
company
come
forward
explanation
refusal
hire
try
confirm
mouth
antagonistic
former
employee
jury
must
instructed
find
explanation
incorrect
must
assess
damages
company
whether
believe
company
guilty
racial
discrimination
disproportionate
minority
makeup
company
workforce
fact
hiring
officer
minority
group
plaintiff
irrelevant
plaintiff
case
proved
indirectly
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
surely
nothing
short
inescapable
prior
holdings
dissent
pretend
make
one
assume
law
created
authority
impose
liability
upon
employer
alleged
discriminatory
employment
practices
unless
appropriate
factfinder
determines
according
proper
procedures
employer
unlawfully
discriminated
may
according
traditional
practice
establish
certain
modes
orders
proof
including
initial
rebuttable
presumption
sort
described
earlier
opinion
believe
mcdonnell
douglas
represents
nothing
law
permit
us
substitute
required
finding
employer
action
product
unlawful
discrimination
much
different
much
lesser
finding
employer
explanation
action
believable
dissent
position
amounts
precisely
unless
required
establish
mcdonnell
douglas
prima
facie
case
degree
proof
high
absence
rebuttal
require
directed
verdict
plaintiff
case
proving
employer
rebuttal
noncredible
leave
plaintiff
case
place
compel
judgment
favor
quite
obviously
however
required
establish
mcdonnell
douglas
prima
facie
case
infinitely
less
directed
verdict
demands
dissent
thus
left
position
support
statute
support
reason
matter
support
holding
even
contended
support
dicta
opinions
turn
begrudgingly
since
think
generally
undesirable
holdings
issue
dissect
sentences
reports
though
code
principal
case
dissent
relies
burdine
statements
opinion
read
support
dissent
position
one
bear
meaning
consistent
interpretation
one
exception
simply
incompatible
language
case
burdine
describes
situation
obtains
employer
met
burden
adducing
nondiscriminatory
reason
follows
third
defendant
carry
burden
plaintiff
must
opportunity
prove
preponderance
evidence
legitimate
reasons
offered
defendant
true
reasons
pretext
discrimination
dissent
takes
mean
plaintiff
proves
asserted
reason
false
plaintiff
wins
reason
proved
pretext
discrimination
unless
shown
reason
false
discrimination
real
reason
burdine
later
allusions
proving
demonstrating
simply
pretext
reasonably
understood
refer
previously
described
pretext
pretext
discrimination
burdine
also
says
employer
met
burden
production
factual
inquiry
proceeds
new
level
specificity
dissent
takes
mean
factual
inquiry
reduces
whether
employer
asserted
reason
true
false
false
defendant
loses
new
level
specificity
may
also
believe
refer
fact
inquiry
turns
generalized
factors
establish
prima
facie
case
specific
proofs
rebuttals
discriminatory
motivation
parties
introduced
next
sentence
burdine
says
lacing
burden
production
defendant
thus
serves
frame
factual
issue
sufficient
clarity
plaintiff
full
fair
opportunity
demonstrate
pretext
dissent
thinks
means
factual
issue
remaining
case
whether
employer
reason
false
since
view
pretext
means
pretext
discrimination
think
sentence
must
understood
addressing
form
rather
substance
defendant
production
burden
requirement
employer
clearly
set
forth
reasons
gives
plaintiff
full
fair
rebuttal
opportunity
sentences
later
burdine
says
plaintiff
must
opportunity
demonstrate
proffered
reason
true
reason
employment
decision
burden
merges
ultimate
burden
persuading
victim
intentional
discrimination
dissent
takes
merger
mean
ultimate
burden
persuading
victim
intentional
discrimination
replaced
mere
burden
demonstrat
ing
proffered
reason
true
reason
employment
decision
merger
little
fish
swallows
big
one
surely
reasonable
reading
proving
employer
reason
false
becomes
part
often
considerably
assists
greater
enterprise
proving
real
reason
intentional
discrimination
finally
next
sentence
burdine
says
plaintiff
may
succeed
persuading
victim
intentional
discrimination
either
directly
persuading
discriminatory
reason
likely
motivated
employer
indirectly
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
see
mcdonnell
douglas
ibid
must
agree
dissent
one
words
bear
meaning
falsity
employer
explanation
alone
enough
compel
judgment
plaintiff
problem
dictum
contradicts
renders
inexplicable
numerous
statements
burdine
later
case
law
commencing
citation
authority
burdine
uses
support
proposition
mcdonnell
douglas
say
cited
pages
elsewhere
plaintiff
need
disprove
employer
asserted
reason
fact
says
opposite
retrial
respondent
must
given
full
fair
opportunity
demonstrate
competent
evidence
presumptively
valid
reasons
rejection
fact
coverup
racially
discriminatory
decision
emphasis
added
insist
respondent
must
given
full
fair
opportunity
demonstrate
competent
evidence
whatever
stated
reasons
rejection
decision
reality
racially
premised
emphasis
added
statement
question
also
contradicts
burdine
repeated
assurance
indeed
holding
regarding
burden
persuasion
ultimate
burden
persuading
trier
fact
defendant
intentionally
discriminated
plaintiff
remains
times
plaintiff
plaintiff
retains
burden
persuasion
lastly
statement
renders
inexplicable
burdine
explicit
reliance
describing
shifting
burdens
mcdonnell
douglas
upon
authorities
setting
forth
classic
law
presumptions
described
earlier
including
wigmore
evidence
james
hazard
civil
procedure
federal
rule
evidence
maguire
evidence
common
sense
common
law
thayer
preliminary
treatise
evidence
light
inconsistencies
think
dictum
issue
must
regarded
inadvertence
extent
describes
disproof
defendant
reason
totally
independent
rather
auxiliary
means
proving
unlawful
intent
sum
interpretation
burdine
creates
difficulty
one
sentence
dissent
interpretation
causes
many
portions
opinion
incomprehensible
deceptive
whatever
doubt
burdine
might
created
eliminated
aikens
said
language
reasonably
mistaken
ultimate
question
discrimination
vel
non
defendant
responds
plaintiff
proof
offering
evidence
reason
plaintiff
rejection
factfinder
must
decide
dissent
whether
evidence
credible
whether
rejection
discriminatory
within
meaning
title
vii
stage
said
district
position
decide
ultimate
factual
issue
case
whether
defendant
intentionally
discriminated
plaintiff
brackets
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
mcdonnell
douglas
methodology
never
intended
rigid
mechanized
ritualistic
quoting
furnco
rather
defendant
responded
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
district
evidence
needs
decide
dissent
whether
defendant
response
credible
whether
defendant
intentionally
discriminated
plaintiff
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
state
record
close
evidence
district
case
proceeded
specific
question
directly
district
courts
decide
disputed
questions
fact
civil
litigation
confirmation
rather
contradiction
quotes
problematic
passage
burdine
says
plaintiff
may
carry
burden
either
directly
indirectly
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
characterizes
passage
follows
short
district
must
decide
party
explanation
employer
motivation
believes
ibid
enough
words
disbelieve
employer
factfinder
must
believe
plaintiff
explanation
intentional
discrimination
noteworthy
justice
blackmun
although
joining
opinion
aikens
wrote
separate
concurrence
sole
purpose
saying
understood
opinion
saying
dissent
today
asserts
concurrence
joined
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
none
simply
refused
join
opinion
concurring
without
opinion
judgment
think
little
doubt
aikens
meant
iv
turn
finally
dire
practical
consequences
respondents
dissent
claim
decision
today
produce
appears
trouble
dissent
anything
view
rule
adopted
benefit
employers
found
given
false
evidence
law
favo
exempting
responsibility
lies
post
shall
explain
rule
way
gives
special
favor
employers
whose
evidence
disbelieved
initially
must
point
justification
assuming
dissent
repeatedly
employers
whose
evidence
disbelieved
perjurers
liars
see
ibid
employer
lies
employer
lie
found
given
false
evidence
lies
post
benefit
lying
must
lie
offering
false
evidence
employer
lies
employer
caught
lie
rewarded
falsehoods
requires
party
lie
even
typically
cases
individual
defendant
sworn
assertion
regarding
physical
occurrence
pitted
individual
plaintiff
sworn
assertion
regarding
physical
occurrence
surely
imprudent
call
party
whose
assertion
mere
preponderance
evidence
disbelieved
perjurer
liar
title
vii
cases
defendant
ordinarily
individual
company
must
rely
upon
statement
employee
often
relatively
employee
central
fact
central
fact
physical
occurrence
rather
employee
state
mind
say
company
good
faith
introduces
testimony
even
testifying
employee
becomes
liar
perjurer
testimony
believed
nothing
short
absurd
undoubtedly
employers
least
employees
lying
even
readily
identify
perjurers
extraordinary
notion
exempt
responsibility
lies
unless
enter
title
vii
judgments
plaintiffs
title
vii
cause
action
perjury
civil
criminal
remedies
dissent
notion
seen
even
fair
even
handed
punishment
vice
one
realizes
strangely
selective
employer
free
lie
heart
content
whether
plaintiff
ever
applied
job
long
worked
much
made
indeed
anything
everything
except
reason
adverse
employment
action
plaintiff
permitted
lie
absolutely
everything
without
losing
verdict
otherwise
deserves
major
even
sensible
blow
fibbery
respondent
argument
based
upon
employer
supposed
lying
modest
one
defendant
unsuccessfully
offers
phony
reason
logically
better
legal
position
position
overcome
presumption
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
defendant
remains
silent
offers
reasons
conduct
brief
respondent
see
also
brief
amicus
curiae
anomaly
one
recognizes
mcdonnell
douglas
presumption
procedural
device
designed
establish
order
proof
production
books
full
procedural
rules
place
perjurer
initially
least
better
position
truthful
litigant
makes
response
defendant
fails
answer
complaint
motion
suffer
default
judgment
deceitful
response
avoided
defendant
whose
answer
fails
contest
critical
averments
complaint
motion
suffer
judgment
pleadings
untruthful
denials
avoided
rule
defendant
fails
submit
affidavits
creating
genuine
issue
fact
response
motion
summary
judgment
suffer
dismissal
false
affidavits
avoided
rule
cases
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
perjury
may
purchase
defendant
chance
factfinder
though
also
carries
substantial
risks
see
rules
dissent
repeatedly
raises
procedural
objection
impressive
one
mistakes
basic
nature
mcdonnell
douglas
procedure
asserts
holds
enquiry
inquiry
follows
employer
response
prima
facie
case
wide
open
limited
scope
employer
proffered
explanation
post
plaintiff
expected
refute
reasons
articulated
employer
discerned
record
factfinder
saddled
tremendous
disadvantage
confront
defined
task
proving
employer
stated
reasons
false
amorphous
requirement
disproving
possible
nondiscriminatory
reasons
factfinder
might
find
lurking
record
post
scheme
announced
today
conceivable
explanation
employer
actions
might
suggested
evidence
however
unrelated
employer
articulated
reasons
must
addressed
plaintiff
post
statements
imply
employer
proffered
explanation
stated
reasons
articulated
reasons
somehow
exist
apart
record
pleading
perhaps
formal
nontestimonial
statement
made
behalf
defendant
factfinder
honor
pursuant
mcdonnell
douglas
defendant
hereby
formally
asserts
reason
dismissal
issue
incompetence
employee
course
work
like
reasons
defendant
sets
forth
set
forth
introduction
admissible
evidence
burdine
words
defendant
articulated
reasons
found
lurking
record
thus
makes
sense
contemplate
employer
caught
lie
succeeds
injecting
trial
unarticulated
reason
actions
post
emphasis
added
problem
exists
us
dissent
employer
met
preliminary
burden
plaintiff
need
prove
discrimination
therefore
need
disprove
reasons
suggested
matter
vaguely
record
must
device
determining
particular
portions
record
represent
articulated
reasons
set
forth
sufficient
clarity
satisfy
mcdonnell
douglas
since
evidence
plaintiff
must
refute
course
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
makes
provision
determination
made
close
trial
medias
res
since
otherwise
plaintiff
know
evidence
offer
makes
sense
respondent
contends
litigation
decision
employer
place
controversy
particular
explanations
eliminates
consideration
alternative
explanations
employer
chose
advance
brief
respondent
employer
bear
contends
responsibility
choices
risk
plaintiff
disprove
pretextual
reasons
therefore
prevail
emphasis
added
therefore
problematic
title
vii
award
damages
employers
prove
nondiscriminatory
reason
adverse
employment
action
employers
proven
taken
adverse
employment
action
reason
context
present
case
race
employer
proffered
reason
unpersuasive
even
obviously
contrived
necessarily
establish
plaintiff
proffered
reason
race
correct
remains
question
factfinder
answer
subject
course
appellate
review
conducted
remand
case
clearly
erroneous
standard
federal
rule
civil
procedure
see
anderson
bessemer
city
finally
respondent
argues
particularly
us
come
forth
holding
pronounce
today
congress
provided
right
jury
trials
title
vii
cases
brief
respondent
see
civil
rights
act
stat
supp
iii
providing
jury
trial
right
certain
title
vii
suits
think
quite
opposite
true
clarity
regarding
requisite
elements
proof
becomes
important
jury
must
instructed
concerning
detailed
factual
findings
trial
available
upon
review
question
facing
triers
fact
discrimination
cases
sensitive
difficult
prohibitions
discrimination
contained
civil
rights
act
reflect
important
national
policy
seldom
eyewitness
testimony
employer
mental
processes
none
means
trial
courts
reviewing
courts
treat
discrimination
differently
ultimate
questions
fact
make
inquiry
even
difficult
applying
legal
rules
devised
govern
basic
allocation
burdens
order
presentation
proof
burdine
deciding
ultimate
question
ordered
footnotes
various
considerations
led
conclusion
including
fact
two
blacks
sat
disciplinary
review
board
recommended
disciplining
respondent
respondent
black
subordinates
actually
committed
violations
disciplined
number
black
employees
mary
remained
constant
finder
fact
answers
affirmatively
finds
prima
facie
case
supported
preponderance
evidence
must
find
existence
presumed
fact
unlawful
discrimination
must
therefore
render
verdict
plaintiff
see
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdine
james
hazard
civil
procedure
ed
louisell
mueller
federal
evidence
pp
thus
effect
failing
produce
evidence
rebut
mcdonnell
douglas
green
presumption
felt
prima
facie
case
established
either
matter
law
plaintiff
facts
uncontested
factfinder
determination
plaintiff
facts
supported
preponderance
evidence
thus
technically
accurate
describe
sequence
burdine
first
plaintiff
burden
proving
preponderance
evidence
prima
facie
case
discrimination
second
plaintiff
succeeds
proving
prima
facie
case
burden
shifts
defendant
articulate
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reason
employee
rejection
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
practical
matter
however
sequence
trial
defendant
feels
burden
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
proved
soon
evidence
introduced
defendant
knows
failure
introduce
evidence
nondiscriminatory
reason
cause
judgment
go
unless
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
held
inadequate
law
fails
convince
factfinder
practical
coercion
causes
mcdonnell
douglas
presumption
function
means
arranging
presentation
evidence
watson
fort
worth
bank
trust
contrary
dissent
analysis
post
nothing
whatever
inconsistent
statement
later
statements
plaintiff
must
show
reason
false
discrimination
real
reason
infra
enough
disbelieve
employer
infra
even
though
say
rejection
defendant
proffered
reasons
enough
law
sustain
finding
discrimination
must
finding
discrimination
dissent
response
unrealistic
hypothetical
except
assert
surely
employer
must
personnel
records
resort
demonstrate
reason
failure
hire
notion
every
reasonable
employer
keeps
personnel
records
people
never
became
personnel
showing
become
personnel
respects
people
hired
better
seems
us
highly
fanciful
sake
american
business
hope
fundamentally
dissent
response
misses
point
even
personnel
records
exist
mockery
justice
say
jury
believes
reason
set
forth
probably
true
one
utterly
compelling
evidence
discrimination
reason
excluded
jury
consideration
true
mcdonnell
douglas
concluding
summary
framework
created
relied
upon
dissent
post
effect
plaintiff
fails
show
pretext
challenged
employment
action
must
stand
burdine
pretext
means
pretext
required
earlier
opinion
pretext
sort
discrimination
prohibited
title
vii
dissent
reading
leaves
burden
persuasion
plaintiff
sure
burden
persuading
factfinder
employer
explanation
true
beneath
contempt
unanimous
opinion
less
play
word
games
concept
leaving
burden
persuasion
upon
plaintiff
parity
analysis
said
holding
criminal
defendant
guilty
unless
comes
forward
credible
alibi
shift
ultimate
burden
persuasion
long
government
burden
persuading
factfinder
alibi
credible
justice
souter
justice
white
justice
blackmun
justice
stevens
join
dissenting
twenty
years
ago
mcdonnell
douglas
green
unanimously
prescribed
sensible
orderly
way
evaluate
evidence
title
vii
disparate
treatment
case
giving
plaintiff
defendant
fair
opportunities
litigate
light
common
experience
bears
critical
question
discrimination
furnco
constr
waters
repeatedly
reaffirmed
refined
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
notably
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdine
another
unanimous
opinion
see
also
postal
service
bd
governors
aikens
furnco
supra
today
two
decades
stable
law
relatively
recent
disruption
circuits
see
ante
abandons
practical
framework
together
central
purpose
sharpen
inquiry
elusive
factual
question
intentional
discrimination
burdine
supra
ignoring
language
contrary
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
holds
title
vii
plaintiff
succeeds
showing
trial
defendant
come
forward
pretextual
reasons
actions
response
prima
facie
showing
discrimination
factfinder
still
may
proceed
roam
record
searching
nondiscriminatory
explanation
defendant
raised
plaintiff
fair
opportunity
disprove
majority
departs
settled
precedent
substituting
scheme
proof
disparate
treatment
actions
promises
unfair
unworkable
respectfully
dissent
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
inexplicably
casts
aside
today
summarized
neatly
burdine
first
plaintiff
burden
proving
preponderance
evidence
prima
facie
case
discrimination
second
plaintiff
succeeds
proving
prima
facie
case
burden
shifts
defendant
articulate
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reason
employee
rejection
third
defendant
carry
burden
plaintiff
must
opportunity
prove
preponderance
evidence
legitimate
reasons
offered
defendant
true
reasons
pretext
discrimination
citations
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
outset
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
plaintiff
alleging
disparate
treatment
workplace
violation
title
vii
must
provide
basis
inference
discrimination
case
agree
melvin
hicks
met
initial
burden
proving
preponderance
evidence
black
therefore
member
protected
class
qualified
shift
commander
demoted
terminated
position
remained
available
later
filled
qualified
applicant
see
hicks
thus
proved
called
prima
facie
case
discrimination
important
note
context
prima
facie
case
indeed
proven
case
although
contexts
prima
facie
case
requires
production
enough
evidence
raise
issue
trier
fact
means
plaintiff
actually
established
elements
prima
facie
case
satisfaction
factfinder
preponderance
evidence
see
burdine
hicks
eliminat
ed
common
nondiscriminatory
reasons
demotion
firing
unqualified
position
position
longer
available
given
assumption
people
act
totally
arbitrary
manner
without
underlying
reasons
especially
business
setting
explained
prima
facie
case
implies
discrimination
presume
employer
acts
otherwise
unexplained
likely
based
consideration
impermissible
factors
furnco
see
also
burdine
supra
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
however
proof
prima
facie
case
raises
inference
discrimination
absence
evidence
also
creates
mandatory
presumption
favor
plaintiff
although
employer
bears
trial
burden
plaintiff
proves
prima
facie
case
plaintiff
employer
must
either
respond
lose
made
clear
burdine
employer
silent
face
presumption
must
enter
judgment
plaintiff
see
ante
circumstances
factfinder
must
find
existence
presumed
fact
unlawful
discrimination
must
therefore
render
verdict
plaintiff
emphasis
original
thus
employer
remains
silent
acted
reason
embarrassed
reveal
reason
fails
discover
see
ante
plaintiff
entitled
judgment
burdine
obviously
unfair
bar
employer
coming
forward
stage
nondiscriminatory
explanation
actions
since
lack
open
position
plaintiff
lack
qualifications
exhaust
set
nondiscriminatory
reasons
might
explain
adverse
personnel
decision
trier
fact
consider
explanations
employers
autonomy
curtailed
far
beyond
needed
rectify
discrimination
identified
congress
cf
furnco
supra
title
vii
impose
duty
adopt
hiring
procedure
maximizes
hiring
minority
employees
hand
equally
unfair
utterly
impractical
saddle
victims
discrimination
burden
either
producing
direct
evidence
discriminatory
intent
eliminating
entire
universe
possible
nondiscriminatory
reasons
personnel
decision
mcdonnell
douglas
reconciled
competing
interests
sensible
way
requiring
employer
articulate
introduction
admissible
evidence
one
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reason
actions
burdine
supra
proof
prima
facie
case
thus
serves
catalyst
obligating
employer
step
forward
explanation
actions
mary
case
used
opportunity
provide
two
reasons
treatment
hicks
severity
accumulation
rule
infractions
allegedly
committed
emphasizes
employer
obligation
stage
burden
production
ante
see
employer
meets
burden
presumption
entitling
plaintiff
judgment
drops
case
see
ante
much
certainly
true
obligation
also
serves
important
function
neglected
majority
requiring
employer
frame
factual
issue
sufficient
clarity
plaintiff
full
fair
opportunity
demonstrate
pretext
employer
words
burden
production
gives
right
choose
scope
factual
issues
resolved
factfinder
investing
employer
choice
point
unless
scope
chooses
binds
employer
well
plaintiff
make
sense
tell
employer
done
explanation
legitimate
reasons
must
clear
reasonably
specific
factfinder
rely
reason
clearly
articulated
one
articulated
rule
favor
employer
see
articulation
admitted
evidence
suffice
employer
chooses
battleground
manner
factual
inquiry
proceeds
new
level
specificity
final
specific
enquiry
employer
burden
prove
proffered
reasons
true
rather
plaintiff
must
prove
preponderance
evidence
proffered
reasons
pretextual
mcdonnell
douglas
makes
clear
plaintiff
fails
show
pretext
challenged
employment
action
must
stand
hand
plaintiff
carries
burden
showing
pretext
must
order
prompt
appropriate
remedy
ibid
said
burdine
plaintiff
must
opportunity
demonstrate
proffered
reason
true
reason
employment
decision
burden
merges
ultimate
burden
persuading
plaintiff
victim
intentional
discrimination
burdine
drives
home
point
case
proceeded
new
level
specificity
explaining
plaintiff
meet
burden
persuasion
either
two
ways
either
directly
persuading
discriminatory
reason
likely
motivated
employer
indirectly
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
ibid
see
aikens
quoting
language
burdine
blackmun
joined
brennan
concurring
see
also
price
waterhouse
hopkins
kennedy
dissenting
discussing
two
alternative
methods
relying
justice
blackmun
concurrence
aikens
plaintiff
succeed
simply
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
indicates
case
narrowed
question
whether
employer
proffered
reasons
pretextual
thus
hicks
carried
burden
persuasion
showing
mary
proffered
reasons
unworthy
credence
appeals
properly
concluded
entitled
judgment
today
decides
abandon
settled
law
sets
structure
trying
title
vii
cases
adopt
scheme
unfair
plaintiffs
unworkable
practice
inexplicable
forgiving
employers
present
false
evidence
majority
scheme
employer
succeeds
meeting
burden
production
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
longer
relevant
ante
whereas
said
burdine
employer
carries
burden
production
factual
inquiry
proceeds
new
level
specificity
holds
enquiry
wide
open
limited
scope
employer
proffered
explanation
despite
assiduous
effort
reinterpret
precedents
remains
clear
today
decision
stems
flat
misreading
burdine
ignores
central
purpose
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
progressively
sharpen
inquiry
elusive
factual
question
intentional
discrimination
repeatedly
identified
compelling
reason
limiting
factual
issues
final
stage
mcdonnell
douglas
case
requirement
plaintiff
afforded
full
fair
opportunity
demonstrate
pretext
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
plaintiff
must
opportunity
demonstrate
pretext
aikens
supra
furnco
mcdonnell
douglas
majority
fails
explain
plaintiff
scheme
ever
full
fair
opportunity
demonstrate
reasons
articulated
employer
discerned
record
factfinder
also
unworthy
credence
thus
transforms
employer
burden
production
device
used
provide
notice
promote
fairness
misleading
potentially
useless
ritual
majority
scheme
greatly
disfavors
title
vii
plaintiffs
without
good
luck
direct
evidence
discriminatory
intent
repeats
truism
plaintiff
ultimate
burden
proving
discrimination
see
ante
without
ever
facing
practical
question
plaintiff
without
direct
evidence
meet
burden
burdine
provides
answer
telling
us
plaintiff
may
succeed
meeting
ultimate
burden
proving
discrimination
indirectly
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
see
aikens
blackmun
joined
brennan
concurring
possibility
practical
procedure
addressing
burdine
calls
indirect
proof
crucial
success
title
vii
claims
simple
reason
employers
discriminate
likely
announce
discriminatory
motive
yet
majority
scheme
victim
discrimination
lacking
direct
evidence
saddled
tremendous
disadvantage
confront
defined
task
proving
employer
stated
reasons
false
amorphous
requirement
disproving
possible
nondiscriminatory
reasons
factfinder
might
find
lurking
record
words
plaintiff
must
disprove
reasons
suggested
matter
vaguely
record
ante
emphasis
original
appears
acknowledge
plaintiff
task
disproving
even
vaguely
suggested
reasons
recognizes
need
larity
regarding
requisite
elements
proof
ante
nonetheless
gives
conflicting
signals
scope
holding
case
one
passage
although
proof
falsity
employer
proffered
reasons
compe
judgment
plaintiff
evidence
without
permit
trier
fact
infer
ultimate
fact
intentional
discrimination
ante
emphasis
deleted
view
implicit
decision
remand
case
ante
keeping
hicks
chance
winning
judgment
alive
although
done
addition
proving
prima
facie
case
show
reasons
proffered
mary
unworthy
credence
language
opinion
supports
extreme
conclusion
proof
falsity
employer
articulated
reasons
even
sufficient
sustain
judgment
plaintiff
example
twice
plaintiff
must
show
reason
false
discrimination
real
reason
ante
see
ante
addition
summing
reading
earlier
cases
enough
disbelieve
employer
ante
emphasis
deleted
approach
turn
burdine
head
see
supra
result
summary
judgment
employer
many
cases
plaintiff
evidence
beyond
required
prove
prima
facie
case
show
employer
articulated
reasons
unworthy
credence
cf
carter
app
scalia
dissenting
order
get
jury
plaintiff
introduce
evidence
basis
discriminatory
treatment
race
emphasis
original
see
generally
lanctot
defendant
lies
plaintiff
loses
fallacy
rule
employment
discrimination
cases
hastings
criticizing
approach
fails
explain
moreover
either
interpretation
holding
proof
employer
articulated
reasons
unpersuasive
even
obviously
contrived
ante
falls
short
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
reason
situation
question
discriminatory
intent
plaintiff
raised
inference
discrimination
though
longer
presumption
proof
prima
facie
case
noted
burdine
circumstantial
proof
discrimination
also
used
plaintiff
show
pretext
proof
merely
strengthened
showing
use
evidence
employer
articulated
reasons
false
since
common
experience
tells
us
likely
employer
lies
simply
trying
cover
illegality
alleged
plaintiff
furnco
unless
mcdonnell
douglas
command
structure
limit
case
employer
chooses
rendered
meaningless
look
beyond
employer
lie
assuming
possible
existence
reasons
employer
might
proffered
without
lying
telling
factfinder
keep
digging
cases
plaintiff
proof
pretext
turns
showing
employer
reasons
unworthy
credence
majority
rejects
point
mcdonnell
douglas
rule
requiring
scope
factual
enquiry
limited
albeit
manner
chosen
employer
throwing
rule
benefit
employers
found
given
false
evidence
law
simply
justification
favoring
employers
exempting
responsibility
lies
may
indeed
true
employers
nondiscriminatory
reasons
actions
ones
shameful
wish
conceal
one
understand
human
frailty
natural
desire
conceal
however
without
finding
justification
dispense
orderly
procedure
getting
elusive
factual
question
intentional
discrimination
burdine
justification
employer
favor
consequences
actual
potential
title
vii
litigants
stand
sharply
extent
workers
like
melvin
hicks
decide
sue
given
uncertainties
face
majority
scheme
legislative
purpose
adopting
title
vii
frustrated
extent
workers
nevertheless
decide
press
forward
result
likely
wasted
time
effort
money
concerned
scheme
announced
today
conceivable
explanation
employer
actions
might
suggested
evidence
however
unrelated
employer
articulated
reasons
must
addressed
plaintiff
wish
risk
losing
since
say
whether
trial
may
limit
introduction
evidence
trial
relevant
employer
articulated
reasons
since
employer
win
possibility
unstated
reason
scope
admissible
evidence
trial
presumably
includes
evidence
potentially
relevant
ultimate
question
discrimination
unlimited
employer
stated
reasons
ante
title
vii
trials
promise
tedious
affairs
even
contrary
relevant
evidence
still
somehow
limited
reference
employer
reasons
however
vaguely
articulated
careful
plaintiff
anticipate
side
issues
might
arise
even
limited
evidentiary
presentation
thus
either
case
pretrial
discovery
become
extensive
wide
ranging
plaintiff
afford
much
wider
set
facts
prove
relevant
important
trial
majority
scheme
therefore
promote
longer
trials
pretrial
discovery
threatening
increased
expense
delay
title
vii
litigation
plaintiffs
defendants
increased
burdens
judiciary
addition
unfairness
impracticality
new
scheme
terms
produces
remarkable
results
contrary
assumption
underlying
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
employers
reason
hiring
firing
decisions
see
furnco
supra
emphasis
original
majority
assumes
employers
unable
discover
reasons
personnel
actions
see
ante
majority
scheme
however
employers
faced
proof
prima
facie
case
discrimination
still
must
carry
burden
producing
evidence
challenged
employment
action
taken
nondiscriminatory
reason
ante
thus
employer
claims
produce
evidence
nondiscriminatory
reason
personnel
decision
trier
fact
concludes
plaintiff
proven
prima
facie
case
must
enter
judgment
plaintiff
ante
majority
scheme
therefore
leads
perverse
result
employers
fail
discover
nondiscriminatory
reasons
decisions
hire
fire
employees
benefit
lying
must
lie
defend
successfully
disparate
treatment
action
offering
false
evidence
nondiscriminatory
reason
employer
rebut
presumption
raised
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
hope
factfinder
conclude
employer
may
acted
reason
unknown
rather
discriminatory
reason
know
scheme
structuring
legal
action
terms
requires
party
lie
order
prevail
finally
opinion
destroys
framework
carefully
crafted
precedents
old
years
attempts
deflect
confront
majority
first
contends
opinions
creating
refining
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
consist
primarily
dicta
whose
bearing
issue
consider
today
presumably
ignored
see
ante
readiness
disclaim
considered
pronouncements
devalues
cases
mcdonnell
douglas
set
forth
order
proof
necessarily
go
beyond
minimum
necessary
settle
narrow
dispute
presented
evidentiary
frameworks
set
manner
reason
subject
summary
dismissal
later
cases
products
mere
dicta
courts
litigants
rely
structure
lawsuits
based
federal
statutes
orderly
sensible
manner
casually
abandon
structures
adopted
thus
naturally
declines
rely
entirely
dismissing
prior
directives
dicta
turns
task
interpreting
prior
cases
area
particular
burdine
acknowledging
statements
earlier
cases
may
read
one
instance
must
read
limit
final
enquiry
disparate
treatment
case
question
pretext
declares
reading
cases
utter
ly
implausib
le
ante
imputing
views
earlier
courts
beneath
contempt
ante
unlikely
reading
however
shared
solicitor
general
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
charged
implementing
enforcing
title
vii
related
statutes
see
brief
et
al
amici
curiae
mention
appeals
case
even
count
half
courts
appeals
discussed
question
albeit
dicta
see
ante
company
cause
surprise
reasons
explained
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
provide
clear
answer
question
us
behoove
majority
explain
decision
depart
cases
final
attempt
neutralize
force
precedents
comes
claim
aikens
settled
question
presented
today
attempt
rest
aikens
runs
immediate
difficulty
however
aikens
repeats
said
earlier
burdine
plaintiff
may
succeed
meeting
ultimate
burden
persuasion
either
directly
persuading
discriminatory
reason
likely
motivated
employer
indirectly
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
aikens
quoting
burdine
although
aikens
quoted
statement
approvingly
majority
projects
view
latter
part
statement
problematic
ante
arguing
next
sentence
aikens
takes
care
problem
next
sentence
however
creates
problems
majority
directs
district
decide
party
explanation
employer
motivation
believes
emphasis
supplied
requiring
factfinder
choose
employer
explanation
plaintiff
claim
discrimination
shown
either
directly
indirectly
aikens
flatly
bars
conclusion
factfinder
choose
third
explanation
never
offered
employer
ruling
plaintiff
aikens
bear
reading
majority
seeks
place
upon
hope
projecting
past
abandonment
precedent
occurs
today
join
majority
turning
back
earlier
decisions
considerations
stare
decisis
special
force
area
statutory
interpretation
unlike
context
constitutional
interpretation
legislative
power
implicated
congress
remains
free
alter
done
patterson
mclean
credit
union
though
congress
unaware
decisions
concerning
title
vii
recent
experience
indicates
congress
ready
act
adopt
interpretations
statutory
scheme
finds
mistaken
see
civil
rights
act
stat
congress
taken
action
indicate
mistaken
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
see
reason
title
vii
interpretation
driven
concern
employers
ashamed
honest
expense
victims
discrimination
happen
direct
evidence
discriminatory
intent
respectfully
dissent
majority
following
courts
mentions
hicks
position
filled
white
male
ante
citing
district
opinion
see
directly
addressed
question
whether
personal
characteristics
someone
chosen
replace
title
vii
plaintiff
material
issue
us
today
cf
cumpiano
banco
santander
puerto
rico
identity
replacement
relevant
majority
contends
fl
face
holding
burdine
resurrect
mandatory
presumption
later
stage
cases
plaintiff
proves
employer
proffered
reasons
pretextual
ante
hicks
argue
contrary
see
brief
respondent
citing
evid
question
presented
case
whether
mandatory
presumption
resurrected
everyone
agrees
whether
factual
enquiry
narrowed
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
question
pretext
majority
simply
wrong
suggests
reading
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
proceeds
assumption
employer
reasons
must
stated
apart
record
ante
emphasis
omitted
mentioned
repeat
reasons
must
set
forth
introduction
admissible
evidence
supra
see
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdine
reasons
simply
found
lurking
record
suggests
ante
burdine
requires
employer
articulate
reasons
testimony
admissible
evidence
clear
reasonably
specific
accordingly
plaintiff
need
worry
waiting
identify
employer
reasons
end
trial
case
six
months
trial
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
require
employer
articulate
reasons
clearly
trial
one
example
trouble
case
identifying
two
reasons
hicks
dismissal
mary
articulated
trial
clarified
aspect
mcdonnell
douglas
framework
burdine
question
presented
whether
plaintiff
proved
prima
facie
case
discriminatory
treatment
burden
shifts
defendant
persuade
preponderance
evidence
legitimate
nondiscriminatory
reasons
challenged
employment
action
existed
makes
attempt
rewrite
passages
mcdonnell
douglas
arguing
pretext
discrimination
appear
pretext
actually
ante
seriously
doubt
change
diction
altered
meaning
crucial
passages
manner
majority
suggests
see
infra
even
majority
assumption
crucial
difference
must
believe
mcdonnell
douglas
rather
sloppy
summarizing
opinion
earlier
mcdonnell
douglas
opinion
state
employer
may
use
plaintiff
conduct
pretext
discrimination
see
ante
quoting
sentence
justify
rewriting
mcdonnell
douglas
summary
next
sentence
mcdonnell
douglas
focus
shifts
employer
may
plaintiff
must
show
plaintiff
must
afforded
fair
opportunity
show
employer
stated
reason
plaintiff
rejection
fact
pretext
plain
simple
extent
choosing
pretext
pretext
discrimination
important
mcdonnell
douglas
diction
appears
consistent
sloppy
burdine
course
nails
point
plaintiff
satisfies
burden
simply
proving
employer
explanation
deserve
credence
see
infra
majority
puts
forward
calls
reasonable
reading
passage
ante
chosen
interpretation
merger
occurs
flatly
contradicted
next
sentence
burdine
indicates
majority
subsequently
admits
ante
burden
persuasion
limited
question
pretext
seems
reasonable
interpret
merger
language
harmony
rather
contradiction
immediate
context
burdine
majority
effort
rewrite
burdine
centers
repudiating
passage
see
ante
provided
specific
concrete
guidance
courts
title
vii
litigants
decade
replacing
pretext
wherever
appears
pretext
discrimination
defined
majority
see
ante
two
efforts
intertwined
burdine
tells
us
specifically
plaintiff
prove
either
pretext
pretext
discrimination
either
directly
persuading
discriminatory
reason
likely
motivated
employer
indirectly
showing
employer
proffered
explanation
unworthy
credence
emphasis
added
majority
chosen
method
proving
pretext
discrimination
changes
burdine
either
reason
proved
pretext
discrimination
unless
shown
reason
false
discrimination
real
reason
ante
emphasis
deleted
majority
thus
takes
shorthand
phrase
burdine
pretext
discrimination
discovers
requirements
phrase
directly
odds
specific
requirements
actually
set
burdine
rewrites
burdine
light
discovery
one
amiliar
case
law
ante
persuaded
strategy
sole
therefore
determinative
issue
left
stage
pretext
indicated
discussion
mcdonnell
douglas
various
types
evidence
may
relevant
showing
pretext
decision
reverse
furnco
constr
waters
appeals
conclude
challenged
practices
pretext
discrimination
reminder
burdine
even
employer
meets
plaintiff
prima
facie
case
evidence
previously
introduced
plaintiff
establish
prima
facie
case
inferences
properly
drawn
therefrom
may
considered
trier
fact
issue
whether
employer
explanation
pretextual
foregoing
analysis
burdens
describes
wins
various
combinations
evidence
proof
may
may
also
describe
actual
sequence
events
trial
bench
trial
example
parties
may
limited
presentation
evidence
decided
whether
plaintiff
made
prima
facie
showing
also
may
allow
evidence
situation
decision
aikens
defendant
choose
whether
wishes
simply
attack
prima
facie
case
whether
wants
present
nondiscriminatory
reasons
actions
defendant
chooses
former
approach
factfinder
decide
end
trial
whether
plaintiff
proven
prima
facie
case
defendant
takes
latter
approach
question
factfinder
issue
pretext
postal
service
bd
governors
aikens
see
ante
unlikely
interpretation
new
level
specificity
called
burdine
repeated
aikens
see
issues
facing
plaintiff
discovered
anywhere
evidence
parties
introduced
concerning
discriminatory
motivation
ante
although
majority
chides
referring
employers
offer
false
evidence
liars
see
ante
first
place
employers
company
perjurers
see
ante
event
hardly
absurd
say
individual
lying
factfinder
believe
testimony
whether
testifying
behalf
agent
corporation
ante
factfinders
constantly
must
decide
whether
explanations
offered
true
conclude
preponderance
evidence
proffered
explanation
false
unfair
call
explanation
lie
label
perjury
criminal
concept
jumping
gun
majority
employed
term
see
ante
unrealistically
concerned
rare
case
employer
easily
turn
one
employees
explanation
personnel
decision
see
ante
companies
course
keep
personnel
records
records
generally
admissible
rule
federal
rules
evidence
see
martin
funtime
eeoc
alton
packaging
even
employers
keep
records
decisions
means
discovering
likely
reasons
personnel
action
example
interviewing
coworkers
examining
employment
records
identifying
standard
personnel
policies
majority
scheme
rewards
employers
decide
atypical
situation
invent
rather
investigate
concern
drives
majority
point
hypothetical
case
ante
employer
disproportionately
high
percentage
minority
workers
nonetheless
lose
title
vii
racial
discrimination
case
giving
untrue
reason
challenged
personnel
action
majority
tell
us
however
employer
must
rely
solely
antagonistic
former
employee
ante
rather
personnel
records
among
things
establish
credible
nondiscriminatory
reason
almost
certainly
must
given
facts
assumed
majority
claims
mockery
justice
allow
recovery
employer
presents
compelling
evidence
nondiscrimination
simply
jury
believes
reason
given
personnel
record
probably
true
one
ante
prior
drawing
conclusion
jury
consider
compelling
evidence
least
circumstantial
evidence
truth
nondiscriminatory
explanation
employer
able
argue
lie
avoid
discrimination
charge
general
behavior
demonstrably
meritorious
jury
still
found
plaintiff
carried
burden
show
untruth
untruth
must
real
whopper
else
compelling
evidence
must
compelling
either
event
justice
need
worry
much
mockery
majority
readily
admits
scheme
places
employer
lies
better
position
employer
says
nothing
ante
mcdonnell
douglas
burdine
employer
caught
lie
lose
merits
subjecting
liability
damages
also
prevailing
plaintiff
attorney
fees
including
presumably
fees
extra
time
spent
show
pretext
see
supp
iii
providing
award
reasonable
attorney
fee
prevailing
party
title
vii
action
majority
scheme
employer
caught
lie
succeeds
injecting
trial
unarticulated
reason
actions
win
case
walk
away
rewarded
falsehoods