What did the Supreme Court decide in the Wal-Mart case? And more importantly, how did it justify its decision? (HINT: the key word here is “commonality” (and how it related to “class-action lawsuit”). Try to understand what this legal terms means, as it is key to the court’s decision).

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to block the massive class-action lawsuit brought by over 1.5 million women against Wal-Mart for sex discrimination in pay and promotions. The Court held that the proposed class failed the “commonality” requirement under Federal Rule 23(a)(2), which demands common questions of law or fact whose answers will drive the litigation for all members. Justice Scalia wrote that Wal-Mart’s policy of giving local managers broad discretion over pay and promotions provided no “glue” linking millions of individual decisions; without a company-wide discriminatory policy, no single trial could resolve the core question “Why was I disfavored?” for everyone at once. The Court also noted the plaintiffs improperly sought monetary back pay under a rule designed only for injunctive relief. This lack of commonality destroyed the class certification and forced each woman to sue individually, shielding large employers from nationwide discrimination challenges.