Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: CAC Reacts to Court’s Discrimination Ruling

“Racial discrimination can infect the contract formation process, and that isn’t altered simply because those contract negotiations ultimately would have failed based on other grounds; the other grounds do not serve as a disinfectant.” — CAC President Elizabeth Wydra

WASHINGTON – On news this morning of the Supreme Court’s ruling in  Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media and Entertainment Studios Networks, Inc., Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra said: 

We are disappointed by today’s ruling by the Supreme Court. We are concerned that requiring a showing of but-for causation for these sorts of discrimination claims ignores not only the text and history of the statute, but also the reality of how racial discrimination functions in workplaces across this nation. As we explained in a brief filed on behalf of Members of Congress, the plain text of Section 1981 does not require a showing of but-for causation, unlike other statutes which contain causal phrases like “because of” and “results from.” Racial discrimination can infect the contract formation process, and that isn’t altered simply because those contract negotiations ultimately would have failed based on other grounds; the other grounds do not serve as a disinfectant.  

#

Resources:

CAC case page in Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American–Owned Media and Entertainment Studios Networks, Inc.https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/comcast-corp-v-national-association-of-african-american-owned-media-and-entertainment-studios-networks-inc/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
March 23, 2020

RELEASE: Reaction to Court’s Ruling in Allen v. Cooper

WASHINGTON – On news this morning of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Allen v. Cooper,...
By: David H. Gans, Dayna Zolle
Civil and Human Rights
March 4, 2020

RELEASE: Chief Justice Roberts Could Determine Fate Of Abortion Law

“During yesterday’s oral argument in the CFPB case, Chief Justice Roberts suggested that the Court’s...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
January 20, 2020

OP-ED: To fulfill Martin Luther King’s Jr’s dream, we must address police racism and brutality

Sacramento Bee (McClatchy News Service)
More than a half-century after Dr. King’s death, discriminatory policing persists. Racial profiling, time and...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
December 2, 2019

Abortion-Rights Groups Weigh in on SCOTUS Privileges Fight

Bloomberg Law
Admitting privileges law imposes significant burdens Provides no benefits, briefs say
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Russo

In June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Russo, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Fifth Circuit’s decision to uphold Louisiana’s Act 620, a law which requires physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at...
Civil and Human Rights
November 7, 2019

Appeals court says Charlottesville lawsuit against InfoWars can continue

The Daily Progress
A defamation lawsuit against InfoWars and other far-right blogs will move forward after the U.S....