- 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).
- In the Dukes v. Wal-Mart case, the Supreme Court decided that over a million women could not move forward with their class action lawsuit for sex discrimination. The Court said the women didn’t meet the “commonality” requirement, meaning they didn’t all share the same specific harm or experience. Even though the plaintiffs showed years of data proving women were paid less and promoted less than men, the Court focused on the idea that the discrimination wasn’t identical for each person. This technical detail let the Court avoid addressing the bigger issue of gender bias at the company. Justice Scalia claimed there wasn’t enough “glue” holding the women’s experiences together, while Justice Ginsburg pointed out that corporate discretion can still lead to widespread discrimination. The ruling basically said that if the harm doesn’t look exactly the same, it doesn’t count as a shared problem. That’s a narrow way to look at justice. The decision shut the door on one of the most powerful tools workers have to fight unfair treatment together. It made clear that the legal system doesn’t always protect people equally; especially not when bias is buried in everyday systems.
Powered by:
top