View a PDF of our statement here.
(New York, NY – April 17, 2024) Today, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) applauds the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis , which upheld the goal and intent of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects employees from discrimination in the workplace.
LDF filed an amicus brief in Muldrow v. St. Louis in support of St. Louis Police Department Sergeant Jatonya Muldrow. Muldrow argued that she was discriminated against under Title VII when her superiors transferred her to a different position because they gave preference to men. The district court found that the discriminatory transfer was ” [] “Significant employment disadvantage” is “not an adverse employment action” under Title VII. The Eighth Circuit upheld the district court’s decision, finding that discriminatory job transfers and denials of requested transfers are lawful under Title VII if they do not impose a “significant disadvantage” on employees, such as a demotion or reduction in pay. As LDF explained in its amicus brief, this significant disadvantage requirement is harmful to employees and cannot be applied fairly. Such rules also fail to recognize the significant harms caused by non-economic harms in the workplace.
The Supreme Court reversed the 8th Circuit decision and ruled:[a]To succeed in a Title VII lawsuit, an employee must prove some harm caused by the involuntary transfer, but he or she need not prove that harm meets the materiality test. Nowhere in Title VII does the text set forth such a high standard.”
“In practice, the ‘significant disadvantage’ standard upheld by the 8th Circuit would permit discrimination in the workplace and undermine the very foundations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,” said Pilar Whitaker, special economic judicial counsel at LDF. “Today, the Supreme Court made clear that workplace rules must respect the capabilities and dignity of employees.”
The Supreme Court’s decision in Muldrow is an important victory for workers across the country, ensuring that Title VII’s protections against racial discrimination are applied fairly. Contrary to some claims, the decision does not directly relate to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) programs. Unlike the discriminatory transfers at issue in Muldrow, DEIA programs generally do not rely on race in determining the terms and conditions of employment.
“Programs that create diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility are essential to fulfilling employers’ Title VII obligations to create workplaces free of discrimination and where everyone feels accepted and valued,” said Amarea Smyrniotopoulos, senior policy counsel and co-manager of LDF’s Equal Protection Initiative. “Today’s Supreme Court decision reinforces these obligations. As our country becomes more diverse in the coming decades, investing in programs that break down barriers to opportunity is essential to our multiracial democracy. We can’t afford to miss out on talent.”
###
About the Legal Defense Fund: The Legal Defense Fund (LDF) was America’s first civil rights law organization, founded in 1940. In media citations, please refer to us as the Legal Defense Fund or LDF. Since 1957, LDF has been fully independent from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), though LDF was originally founded by the NAACP and shares its commitment to equal rights.