Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: July 30, 2013
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comAt the end of its term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated employment law decision regarding retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The ruling is good news for employees, particularly given the recent spike in these types of claims.
In University of Texas Southwester Medical Center v. Nassar, the Court was asked to define the proper standard of causation for Title VII retaliation claims. As the Court highlighted, Title VII provides for two types of employment claims. The first is what the Court terms “status-based discrimination,” which includes prohibitions against employer discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in the workplace. The second is employer retaliation on account of an employee’s having opposed, complained of, or sought remedies for, unlawful workplace discrimination.
In 1991, Congress amended Title VII to lower the standard of proof for employees pursuing discrimination claims. Under the new standard, claimants only needed to show that the motive to discriminate was one of the employer’s motives, even if the employer also had other, lawful motives that were causative in the employer’s decision. Because Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision appears in a different section of the statute, questions arose regarding whether the new, less burdensome legal standard applied.
In resolving this question, the majority of the Supreme Court held that Title VII retaliation claims must be proved according to traditional principles of but-for causation (i.e., that an employer would not have taken an adverse employment action but for an improper motive). The Court rejected the lower standard of proof favored by employees and adopted by some federal courts. It would have required employees only to prove that the employer had a mixed motive (i.e., that an improper motive was one of multiple reasons for the employment action).
The decision will make it more difficult to prove retaliation claims.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Christine Vanek, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

A Settled Regulatory Environment Enables Confident Capital Planning New Jersey’s new manufacturing incentive program, Next New Jersey Manufacturing Program, enters 2026 with something uncommon in economic development these days: policy stability. The statute is enacted, New Jersey Economic Development Authority’s (“NJEDA”) rules are adopted, and the application portal is open. With the election outcome settled, […]
Author: Michael J. Sheppeard

When done successfully, industry roll-up acquisitions can dramatically grow and strengthen your business. In this post, we break down what an industry roll-up is, why companies pursue it, and what makes it an effective (and sometimes risky) business strategy. What Is an Industry Roll-Up Acquisition? In an industry roll-up acquisition of companies, a buyer acquires multiple companies […]
Author: Dan Brecher

The federal government has launched one of the most ambitious scientific initiatives in decades, and it will redefine how companies develop technology, manage risk, and compete. The Genesis Mission, created by Executive Order and driven by the Department of Energy (“DOE”), is intended to accelerate scientific discovery through a national AI platform that links supercomputers, […]
Author: Michael J. Sheppeard

Stablecoins Leave the Grey Zone Stablecoins were supposed to be the “boring” part of crypto: digital dollars that just work. Yet for years they have lived in a regulatory no-man’s-land, classified one day as securities, the next as commodities, and sometimes as something regulators had not even named yet. That uncertainty is finally starting to […]
Author: Bryce S. Robins

If you operate a business without the proper license, you risk fines, insurance issues, reputational harm, and even business closure. Even innocent mistakes, like forgetting to renew a license, can have significant consequences, such as losing your lawsuit for payment of services that are unlicensed, which makes it imperative to have business license management procedures […]
Author: Dan Brecher

What Developers Need to Know About New Jersey’s Rent Control Exemption Law to Ensure Entitlement to Exemption for Newly Constructed Multi-family Housing. A property owner in Jersey City is facing a $400 million federal class action lawsuit alleging that the landlord did not follow the procedural steps required to be eligible for exemption from local […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!