« Law - NYT focuses on the sexting issue | Main | Ind. Gov't. - More on: "Daniels: I'll veto amended prison bill Changes pushed by prosecutors make cost too high, governor says" »

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Courts - "Welcome to Wal-Mart: The Biggest Case of the Term"

That is the headline to this story in The Atlantic, written by Andrew Cohen. The first paragraph:

On Tuesday morning, the United States Supreme Court will hear argument in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, an already-epic battle between the world's largest corporation and perhaps as many as one million current and former employees, all of them female, who as potential plaintiffs claim the giant retailer engaged in an unlawful pattern and practice of gender discrimination. It is easily one of the biggest cases of the Court's present term and, by many accounts, the biggest class-action discrimination case ever fought. Depending upon how extensively the justices rule, and no matter which side prevails, the Dukes case could dramatically alter the balance of power in civil cases between corporate defendants and the plaintiffs' bar.
Here is the SCOTUSblog case page for Wal-Mart v. Dukes.

A long AP story today by Mark Sherman also emphasizes the important of the case:

At stake is whether the suit can go forward as a class action that could involve 500,000 to 1.6 million women, according to varying estimates, and potentially could cost the world's largest retailer billions of dollars.

But the case's potential importance goes well beyond the Wal-Mart dispute, as evidenced by more than two dozen briefs filed by business interests on Wal-Mart's side, and civil rights, consumer and union groups on the other.

The question is crucial to the viability of discrimination claims, which become powerful vehicles to force change when they are presented together, instead of individually. Class actions increase pressure on businesses to settle suits because of the cost of defending them and the potential for very large judgments.

Columbia University law professor John Coffee said that the high court could bring a virtual end to employment discrimination class actions filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, depending on how it decides the Wal-Mart case.

"Litigation brought by individuals under Title VII is just too costly," Coffee said. "It's either class action or nothing."

[More] Joan Biskupic, the capable Supreme Court reporter for USA TODAY, will have this long story in the morning's paper. A sample:
The question at this point is not whether Wal-Mart discriminated against the women, but whether this group of female workers should ever have been certified to bring a class-action lawsuit. Lower U.S. appeals courts have used varying standards for class certification, and high-court resolution of the Wal-Mart battle could clarify the national ground rules for workers or consumers who try to challenge practices at big companies.

In addition, the case tests the Supreme Court's pro-business bent. "Powerful companies such as Wal-Mart have consistently enjoyed a home field advantage" at the court under Chief Justice John Roberts, asserts the liberal Alliance for Justice in a new report stressing the stakes in the Wal-Mart dispute for women who have traditionally earned less than men.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on March 27, 2011 08:10 PM
Posted to Courts in general