Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4315563247> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 59 of
59
with 100 items per page.
- W4315563247 endingPage "769" @default.
- W4315563247 startingPage "769" @default.
- W4315563247 abstract "Regardless of merit, most individual employment discrimination claims die a fast death at summary judgment. Judges apply the fine mesh net created by McDonnell Douglas v. Green, and most cases are caught in its trap. This dated, obfuscatory Supreme Court case creates a complex and flawed binary approach to causation: either discrimination or an innocent reason caused an adverse employment action. For decades, all three levels of the federal judiciary have wrestled with McDonnell Douglas, creating snarls and knots in construing causation. Because of this causal confusion, the ideal of equal opportunity in employment is on life-support. Judges and practitioners must take note of Bostock v. Clayton County, a stunning Supreme Court case that lays a new foundation to clear this causal confusion. In this Article, I argue that Bostock creates a new mixed-motive paradigm that, if correctly applied, should transform individual discrimination law in this country by allowing juries to hear more cases. Bostock explicitly recognizes what the social sciences have long known: decision-making in the workplace is often complex, and both discriminatory and innocent reasons may be “but-for” causes of an employer’s adverse action against an employee. Tort law labels these “multiple sufficient cause” cases. In the first work of its kind, I apply the causation standards in Bostock to create a taxonomy of causation scenarios that should guide lower courts in their analysis of individual discrimination cases at pre-trial stages. As Bostock borrows its causation standards from tort law, this Article examines the nuances of that discipline to determine the legitimacy of Bostock’s causation discussion. I conclude that while Bostock conforms to tort law, the riddle of causation persists in that and almost every discipline. Still, Bostock’s causation logic is sufficient to guide courts into the future on firm ground. In the first comprehensive work of its kind, this Article assists courts by applying Bostock at each stage of litigation through jury trials. Bostock can help revive the ideal of equal opportunity in employment. I conclude the paper with tandem principled suggestions. First, I posit that the Court or Congress could create a burden-shifting scheme in multiple sufficient cause cases. Second, such a burden shifting of proof would pave the way for an allocation of fault scheme, similar to that found in tort law, whereby the plaintiff would recover those damages that correlate to the employer’s percentage of discriminatory causation." @default.
- W4315563247 created "2023-01-11" @default.
- W4315563247 creator A5028457203 @default.
- W4315563247 date "2022-01-01" @default.
- W4315563247 modified "2023-10-05" @default.
- W4315563247 title "Bostock: A Clean Cut into the Gordian Knot of Causation" @default.
- W4315563247 doi "https://doi.org/10.25172/smulr.75.4.3" @default.
- W4315563247 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
- W4315563247 type Work @default.
- W4315563247 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W4315563247 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W4315563247 hasAuthorship W4315563247A5028457203 @default.
- W4315563247 hasBestOaLocation W43155632471 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C166151441 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C200635333 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C2776463841 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C2781140086 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConcept C2994519032 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C11171543 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C144024400 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C15744967 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C166151441 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C17744445 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C190253527 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C199539241 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C200635333 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C2776463841 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C2777834853 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C2778272461 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C2781140086 @default.
- W4315563247 hasConceptScore W4315563247C2994519032 @default.
- W4315563247 hasIssue "4" @default.
- W4315563247 hasLocation W43155632471 @default.
- W4315563247 hasOpenAccess W4315563247 @default.
- W4315563247 hasPrimaryLocation W43155632471 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W1543214997 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W162593347 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W2017431688 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W3081750338 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W3121718596 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W3123197260 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W4315563247 @default.
- W4315563247 hasRelatedWork W4386334186 @default.
- W4315563247 hasVolume "75" @default.
- W4315563247 isParatext "false" @default.
- W4315563247 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W4315563247 workType "article" @default.