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 decided that the lawsuit was flawed in the commonality case, that means Wal-Mart won the case. In other words, the 1.5 million Wal-Mart female employees those sufferers from discrimination have failed through commonality to fight for rights. Because the Supreme Court held that not all Wal-Mart stores are discriminatory. To reach this conclusion, they emphasized that Wal-Mart has implemented policies to prevent gender discrimination. Although there is plenty of evidence that it has no effect on Wal-Mart’s actual situation, it has become an important reason for the Supreme Court to curb the commonality cases. However, even the women plaintiffs failed, but suing by commonality has positively impacted the society. We may overlook an issue of whether the judge’s will deviate from the facts, and convict the enterprises who do not obey the law? Because the judges simply followed the structure, and they assumed that these structures indicated that the organization complied with civil rights laws, regardless of whether they effectively prevented discrimination.