Supreme Court Reacts to Wal-Mart Sex-Bias Case

Wal-Mart risks the loss of tens of billions of dollars if the court rejects their bid to stop the lawsuit from achieving class-action status. The case, which would mark the largest sexual discrimination case in US history if granted the status it seeks, faults Wal-Mart with unfair treatment towards female employees in connection to pay raises and promotions. Lawyers representing the female workers pointed out that while two-thirds of Wal-Mart's employees are women, the majority of store managers are men. Lawyers also noted that female workers earn less than males in almost all job categories, regardless of the fact that many of the females had been with the company for longer periods of time than their male co-workers. The lawsuit asks for back pay, punitive damages, and a judgment requiring Wal-Mart to rectify its current payment and promotion methods.

However, legal observers who cite the Supreme Court's past pro-business and pro-free market rulings suggest that the court's judgment will probably be in favor of Wal-Mart. Furthermore, Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose decision is regarded as a critical swing vote, seemed to question the grounds for a class action suit. Kennedy questioned the plaintiffs' attorney, Joseph Sellers, on whether he was arguing that Wal-Mart's strong corporate culture is in control of the decisions or if it's the individual managers. In noting such inconsistencies in the case of the plaintiffs, Kennedy suggested that the plaintiffs' claims were not uniform and therefore could not be handled in a class-action lawsuit. The more conservative justices seemed to agree with Kennedy's argument as well as the arguments put forth by Theodore Boutrous Jr., who is representing Wal-Mart. According to Boutrous, there is no discriminatory corporate policy against women. He noted that pay raises and promotions are at the discretion of individual managers at the more than 3,400 Wal-Mart stores. Boutrous further argued against the class-action request in suggesting that the discrimination claims brought forth by 1.5 million women could not be fairly addressed in a single case.

Justice Bader Ginsburg seemed to disagree and stated that the issue at hand is a matter of showing enough evidence to move forward, rather than proving that discrimination existed. She pointed out that Wal-Mart would have the opportunity to discredit any claims against it at the trial. Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayer, and Stephen Beyer also seemed to be in favor of allowing the lawsuit to proceed.

Many in the business community fear that the court's rejection of Wal-Mart's bid to stop the female workers from achieving class-action status will encourage a surge of such class-action lawsuits. Civil rights groups and others fear that by denying the suit class-action status, the court will ultimately weaken the fight against discrimination by removing an important tool.

The Supreme Court is expected to present the final ruling before the end of June.