Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g5fl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T07:40:04.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When “Best Practices” Win, Employees Lose: Symbolic Compliance and Judicial Inference in Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Cases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Linda Hamilton Krieger ,
Rachel Kahn Best  and
Lauren B. Edelman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article provides a new account of employers' advantages over employees in federal employment discrimination cases. We analyze the effects of judicial deference, in which judges use institutionalized employment structures to infer nondiscrimination without scrutinizing those structures in any meaningful way. Using logistic regression to analyze a representative sample of judicial opinions in federal EEO cases during the first thirty‐five years after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, we find that when judges uncritically use the presence of organizational structures to reason about whether discrimination occurred, employers are much more likely to prevail. This pattern is especially pronounced in opinions written by liberal judges. In light of these findings, we offer recommendations for judges, lawyers, and policy makers—including legal academics—who seek to improve the accuracy and efficacy of employment discrimination adjudications.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 40 , Issue 4 , Fall 2015 , pp. 843 - 879
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This article is the third in a series of three deriving from the same data set. The earlier articles are: Edelman, Krieger, Eliason, Albiston, and Mellema, 2011, When Organizations Rule: Judicial Deference to Institutionalized Employment Structures, American Journal of Sociology 117 (3): 888–954 and Best, Edelman, Krieger, and Eliason, 2011, Multiple Disadvantages: An Empirical Test of Intersectionality Theory in EEO Litigation, Law & Society Review 45 (4): 991–1025. Data collection, coding, and analysis for this article, along with the two articles cited above, were supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (SES 0651870) and by grants from the California (UC) Committee on Research and the UC Berkeley School of Law. Some of the work of data collection, coding, and analysis was conducted while Linda Krieger was a fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University, while Lauren Edelman was a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Stanford, California, and while Rachel Best was a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Scholar in Health Policy Research at the University of Michigan. We thank the Discrimination Research Group, funded by the American Bar Foundation, the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, and the Ford Foundation for an invigorating exchange that influenced many of the ideas in this article. We also thank Aaron Smyth for outstanding research assistance. Authorship was fully collaborative.

References

References

Albiston, Catherine R. 1999. The Rule of Law and the Litigation Process: The Paradox of Losing by Winning. Law & Society Review 33 (4):869–910.Google Scholar
Bagenstos, Samuel R. 2006. The Structural Turn and the Limits of Antidiscrimination Law. California Law Review 94 (1):1–47.Google Scholar
Baron, James N., Mittman, Brian S., and Newman, Andrew E. 1991. Targets of Opportunity: Organizational and Environmental Determinants of Gender Integration within the California Civil Service, 1979–1985. American Journal of Sociology 96 (6):1362–1401.Google Scholar
Baum, Lawrence. 1992. Supreme Court Activism and the Constitution. In The Constitution and American Political Development: An Institutional Perspective, ed. Nardulli, Peter F., 150–76. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Best, Rachel Kahn, Lauren, B. Edelman, Krieger, Linda Hamilton, and Eliason, Scott R. 2011. Multiple Disadvantages: An Empirical Test of Intersectionality Theory in EEO Litigation. Law & Society Review 45 (4):991–1025.Google Scholar
Bisom‐Rapp, Susan. 1999. Bulletproofing the Workplace: Symbol and Substance in Employment Discrimination Law Practice. Florida State University Law Review 26:959–1038.Google Scholar
Bisom‐Rapp, Susan. 2001. Fixing Watches with Sledgehammers: The Questionable Embrace of Employee Sexual Harassment Training by the Legal Profession. University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review 24:147–68.Google Scholar
Blumrosen, Alfred W. 1993. Modern Law: The Law Transmission System and Equal Employment Opportunity. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Brest, Paul, and Hamilton Krieger, Linda. 2010. Problem Solving, Decision Making, and Professional Judgment: A Guide for Lawyers and Policymakers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burawoy, Michael. 1979. Manufacturing Consent: Changes in the Labor Process Under Monopoly Capitalism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chambliss, Elizabeth. 1996. Title VII as a Displacement of Conflict. Temple Political & Civil Rights Law Review 6:1–54.Google Scholar
Clayton, Cornell W., and Howard, Gillman, eds. 1999. Supreme Court Decision‐Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cross, Frank B., and Emerson, H. Tiller. 1998. Judicial Partisanship and Obedience to Legal Doctrine: Whistleblowing on the Federal Courts of Appeals. Yale Law Journal 107 (7):2155–76.Google Scholar
Dobbin, Frank. 2009. Inventing Equal Opportunity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Dobbin, Frank, and Sutton, John R. 1998. The Strength of a Weak State: The Rights Revolution and the Rise of Human Resources Management Divisions. American Journal of Sociology 104 (2):441–76.Google Scholar
Dobbin, Frank, John, R. Sutton, Meyer, John W., and Scott, Richard. 1993. Equal Opportunity Law and the Construction of Internal Labor Markets. American Journal of Sociology 99 (2):396–427.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B. 1990. Legal Environments and Organizational Governance: The Expansion of Due Process in the American Workplace. American Journal of Sociology 95 (6):1401–40.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B. 1992. Legal Ambiguity and Symbolic Structures: Organizational Mediation of Civil Rights Law. American Journal of Sociology 97 (6):1531–76.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B. 2005. Law at Work: The Endogenous Construction of Civil Rights. In Handbook of Employment Discrimination Research: Rights and Realities, ed. Nelson, Robert L. and Beth Nielsen, Laura, 337–52. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B. 2007. Overlapping Fields and Constructed Legalities: The Endogeneity of Law. In Private Equity, Corporate Governance, and the Dynamics of Capital Market Regulation, ed. Justin, O'Brien, 55–90. London: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., Howard, S. Erlanger, and John, Lande. 1993. Internal Dispute Resolution: The Transformation of Civil Rights in the Workplace. Law & Society Review 27 (3):497–534.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., Riggs Fuller, Sally, and Mara‐Drita, Iona. 2001. Diversity Rhetoric and the Managerialization of Law. American Journal of Sociology 106 (6):1589–1641.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., Linda, H. Krieger, Eliason, Scott R., Albiston, Catherine R., and Mellema, Virginia. 2011. When Organizations Rule: Judicial Deference to Institutionalized Employment Structures. American Journal of Sociology 117 (3):888–954.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., and Stephen, M. Petterson. 1999. Symbols and Substance in Organizational Response to Civil Rights Law. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 17:107–38.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., and Mark, C. Suchman. 1999. When the “Haves” Hold Court: Speculations on the Organizational Internalization of Law. Law & Society Review 33 (4):941–91.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., Uggen, Christopher, and Erlanger, Howard S. 1999. The Endogeneity of Legal Regulation: Grievance Procedures as Rational Myth. American Journal of Sociology 105 (2):406–54.Google Scholar
Edwards, Richard. 1979. Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Knight, Jack. 1998. The Choices Judges Make. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Knight, Jack. 2000. Toward a Strategic Revolution in Judicial Politics: A Look Back, a Look Ahead. Political Research Quarterly 53 (3):625–61.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Knight, Jack. 2013. Reconsidering Judicial Preferences. Annual Review of Political Science 16:11–31.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Martin, Andrew D. 2010. Does Public Opinion Influence the Supreme Court? Possibly Yes (But We're Not Sure Why). University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 13:263–81.Google Scholar
Eskridge, William N. Jr. 1991a. Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions. Yale Law Journal 101 (2):331–455.Google Scholar
Eskridge, William N. Jr. 1991b. Reneging on History? Playing the Court/Congress/President Civil Rights Game. California Law Review 79 (3):613–84.Google Scholar
Estlund, Cynthia. 2011. Just the Facts: The Case for Workplace Transparency. Stanford Law Review 63 (2):351–407.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M., and Edward, L. Rubin. 1999. Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America's Prisons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fraidin, Matthew I. 2013. Decision‐Making in Dependency Court: Heuristics, Cognitive Biases, and Accountability. Cleveland State Law Review 60:913–74.Google Scholar
Frederick, Shane. 2005. Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making. Journal of Economic Perspectives 19 (4):25–42.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc. 1974. Why the Haves Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change. Law & Society Review 9 (1):95–160.Google Scholar
Gertner, Nancy. 2012. Losers' Rules. Yale Law Journal Online 122:109–23.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1983. From Simplicity to Complexity: The Development of Theory in the Study of Judicial Behavior. Political Behavior 5 (1):7–49.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Daniel T. 1989. Thinking Lightly About Others: Automatic Components of the Social Inference Process. In Unintended Thought, ed. Uleman, James S. and Bargh, John A., 189–211 New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Daniel T., and Patrick, S. Malone. 1995. The Correspondence Bias. Psychological Bulletin 117 (1):21–38.Google Scholar
Giles, Micheal W., Virginia, A. Hettinger, and Todd, Peppers. 2001. Picking Federal Judges: A Note on Policy and Partisan Selection Agendas. Political Research Quarterly 54 (3):623–41.Google Scholar
Gordon, David M., Edwards, Richard, and Reich, Michael. 1982. Segmented Work, Divided Workers: The Historical Transformation of Labor in the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Green, Tristin K. 2003. Discrimination in Workplace Dynamics: Toward a Structural Account of Disparate Treatment Theory. Harvard Civil Rights‐Civil Liberties Law Review 38:91–157.Google Scholar
Green, Tristin K. 2005. Work Culture and Discrimination. California Law Review 93 (3):623–84.Google Scholar
Green, Tristin K. 2007. A Structural Approach as Antidiscrimination Mandate: Locating Employer Wrong. Vanderbilt Law Review 60 (3):849–904.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joanna L. 2000. The First Bite Is Free: Employer Liability for Sexual Harassment. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 61:671–740.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joanna L. 2003. The Culture of Compliance: The Final Triumph of Form Over Substance in Sexual Harassment Law. Harvard Women's Law Journal 26:3–75.Google Scholar
Gulati, Mitu, Jeffrey, J. Rachlinski, and Langevoort, Donald C. 2004. Fraud by Hindsight. Northwestern University Law Review 98:773–825.Google Scholar
Guthrie, Chris, Jeffrey, J. Rachlinski, and Wistrich, Andrew J. 2001. Inside the Judicial Mind. Cornell Law Review 86:777–830.Google Scholar
Guthrie, Chris, Jeffrey, J. Rachlinski, and Wistrich, Andrew J. 2002. Judging by Heuristic: Cognitive Illusions in Judicial Decision Making. Judicature 86 (1):44–50.Google Scholar
Guthrie, Chris, Rachlinski, Jeffrey J., and Wistrich, Andrew J. 2007. Blinking on the Bench: How Judges Decide Cases. Cornell Law Review 93:1–43.Google Scholar
Jolls, Christine. 2001. Antidiscrimination and Accommodation. Harvard Law Review 115 (2):642–99.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Frederick, Shane. 2002. Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment. In Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, ed. Thomas, Gilovich, Dale, Griffin and Daniel, Kahneman, 49–81 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Cheryl R., Brenda, Major, Ines, Jurcevic, Dover, Tessa L., Brady, Laura M., and Shapiro, Jenessa R. 2013. Presumed Fair: Ironic Effects of Organizational Diversity Structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104 (3):504–19.Google Scholar
Kalev, Alexandra, and Dobbin, Frank. 2006. Enforcement of Civil Rights Law in Private Workplaces: The Effects of Compliance Reviews and Lawsuits Over Time. Law & Social Inquiry 31 (4):855–903.Google Scholar
Kalev, Alexandra, Dobbin, Frank, and Kelly, Erin. 2006. Best Practices or Best Guesses? Assessing the Efficacy of Corporate Affirmative Action and Diversity Policies. American Sociological Review 71 (4):589–617.Google Scholar
Kamieniecki, Sheldon. 2006. Corporate America and Environmental Policy: How Often Does Business Get Its Way? Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Kamin, Kim A., and Jeffrey, J. Rachlinski. 1995. Ex Post ≠ Ex Ante: Determining Liability in Hindsight. Law and Human Behavior 19 (1):89–104.Google Scholar
Kelly, Erin L. 2003. The Strange History of Employer‐Sponsored Child Care: Interested Actors, Uncertainty, and the Transformation of Law in Organizational Fields. American Journal of Sociology 109 (3):606–49.Google Scholar
Knight, Jack, and Epstein, Lee. 1996. The Norm of Stare Decisis. American Journal of Political Science 40 (4):1018–35.Google Scholar
Krawiec, Kimberly D. 2003. Cosmetic Compliance and the Failure of Negotiated Governance. Washington University Law Quarterly 81:487–544.Google Scholar
Krieger, Linda Hamilton. 1995. The Content of Our Categories: A Cognitive Bias Approach to Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity. Stanford Law Review 47 (6):1161–1248.Google Scholar
Krieger, Linda Hamilton. 1998. Civil Rights Perestroika: Intergroup Relations After Affirmative Action. California Law Review 86 (6):1251–1333.Google Scholar
Krieger, Linda Hamilton. 2007. The Watched Variable Improves: On Eliminating Sex Discrimination in Employment. In Sex Discrimination in the Workplace: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, ed. Crosby, Faye, Stockdale, Margaret, and Ann Ropp, S., 295–329. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Krieger, Linda Hamilton, and Fiske, Susan T. 2006. Behavioral Realism in Employment Discrimination Law: Implicit Bias and Disparate Treatment. California Law Review 94 (4):997–1062.Google Scholar
Leech, Beth L., Baumgartner, Frank R., Berry, Jeffrey M., Hojnacki, Marie, and Kimball, David C. 2002. Organized Interests and Issue Definition in Policy Debates. In Interest Group Politics, ed. Cigler, Allan J. and Loomis, Burdett A., 275–92. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Lobel, Orly. 2004. The Renew Deal: The Fall of Regulation and the Rise of Governance in Contemporary Legal Thought. Minnesota Law Review 89:342–70.Google Scholar
Lobel, Orly. 2009. Citizenship, Organizational Citizenship, and the Laws of Overlapping Obligations. California Law Review 97 (2):433–99.Google Scholar
Lobel, Orly. 2012. Linking Prevention, Detection, and Whistleblowing: Principles for Designing Effective Reporting Systems. South Texas Law Review 54:37–52.Google Scholar
Marshall, Anna‐Maria. 2005. Idle Rights: Employees' Rights Consciousness and the Construction of Sexual Harassment Policies. Law & Society Review 39 (1):83–124.Google Scholar
Maveety, Nancy. 2003. The Study of Judicial Behavior and the Discipline of Political Science. In The Pioneers of Judicial Behavior, ed. Nancy, Maveety, 1–51 Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
McGuire, Kevin T. 2004. The Institutionalization of the U.S. Supreme Court. Political Analysis 12 (2):128–42.Google Scholar
Nakao, Keiko, and Treas, Judith. 1992. The 1989 Socioeconomic Index of Occupations: Construction from the 1989 Occupational Prestige Scores. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center.Google Scholar
Nielsen, Laura Beth, Nelson, Robert L., and Lancaster, Ryon. 2010. Individual Justice or Collective Legal Mobilization? Employment Discrimination Litigation in the Post Civil Rights United States. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 7 (2):175–201.Google Scholar
Pinello, Daniel R. 1999. Linking Party to Judicial Ideology in American Courts: A Meta‐Analysis. Justice System Journal 20 (3):219–54.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T. 1998. Recovering a Basic Space from a Set of Issue Scales. American Journal of Political Science 42 (3):954–93.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1997. Congress: A Political‐Economic History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 1993. What Do Judges and Justices Maximize? (The Same Thing Everybody Else Does). Supreme Court Economic Review 3:1–41.Google Scholar
Powers, James. 2014. A Status Quo Bias: Behavioral Economics and the Federal Preliminary Injunction Standard. Texas Law Review 92:1027–51.Google Scholar
Pritchett, C. Herman. 1948. The Roosevelt Court: A Study in Judicial Politics and Values, 1937–1947. New York Macmillan.Google Scholar
Purcell, Edward A. Jr. 1992. Litigation and Inequality : Federal Diversity Jurisdiction in Industrial America, 1870–1958. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Quintanilla, Victor D. 2011. Beyond Common Sense: A Social Psychological Study of Iqbal's Effect on Claims of Race Discrimination. Michigan Journal of Race & Law 17:1–62.Google Scholar
Rachlinski, Jeffrey J. 1998. A Positive Psychological Theory of Judging in Hindsight. University of Chicago Law Review 65:571–625.Google Scholar
Rachlinski, Jeffrey J. 2011. Processing Pleadings and the Psychology of Prejudgment. DePaul Law Review 60:413–29.Google Scholar
Rachlinski, Jeffrey J., Johnson, Sheri Lynn, Wistrich, Andrew J., and Guthrie, Chris. 2009. Does Unconscious Racial Bias Affect Trial Judges. Notre Dame Law Review 84 (3):1195–1246.Google Scholar
Rachlinski, Jeffrey J., Andrew, J. Wistrich, and Chris, Guthrie. 2013. Altering Attention in Adjudication. UCLA Law Review 60 (6):1587–1618.Google Scholar
Ramji‐Nogales, Jaya, Schoenholtz, Andrew I., and Schrag, Philip G. 2009. Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Revesz, Richard L. 1997. Environmental Regulation, Ideology, and the D.C. Circuit. Virginia Law Review 83 (8):1717–72.Google Scholar
Roethlisberger, F. J., and Dickson, William J. 1939. Management and the Worker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Daniel M. 2005. Using the Social Background Model to Explain Who Wins Federal Appellate Tax Decisions: Do Less Traditional Judges Favor the Taxpayer? Virginia Tax Review 25:201–49.Google Scholar
Scott, W. Richard, and Davis, Gerald F. 2007. Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems Perspectives. London: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Albert, D. Cover. 1989. Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices. American Political Science Review 83 (2):557–65.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold, J. Spaeth. 1993. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold, J. Spaeth. 1996. The Influence of Stare Decisis on the Votes of United States Supreme Court Justices. American Journal of Political Science 40 (4):971–1003.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold, J. Spaeth. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Selznick, Philip. 1949. TVA and the Grass Roots: A Study in the Sociology of Formal Organization. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Selznick, Philip. 1957. Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Shepherd, Joanna M. 2009. The Influence of Retention Politics on Judges' Voting. Journal of Legal Studies 38 (1):169–206.Google Scholar
Siegelman, Peter, and Donahue, John J. 1990. Studying the Iceberg from its Tip: A Comparison of Published and Unpublished Employment Discrimination Cases. Law & Society Review 24 (5):1133–70.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R., and Reginald, S. Sheehan. 1993. Interest Group Success in the Courts: Amicus Participation in the Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly 46 (2):339–54.Google Scholar
Spaeth, Harold J., and Jeffrey, A. Segal. 1999. Majority Rule or Minority Will: Adherence to Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stigler, George J. 1971. The Theory of Economic Regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 2 (1):3–21.Google Scholar
Stone, Christopher D. 1975. Where the Law Ends: The Social Control of Corporate Behavior. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Sturm, Susan. 2001. Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach. Columbia Law Review 101 (3):458–568.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., Schkade, David, and Michelle Ellman, Lisa. 2004. Ideological Voting on Federal Courts of Appeals: A Preliminary Investigation. Virginia Law Review 90:301–54.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., Schkade, David, Ellman, Lisa M., and Sawicki, Andres. 2006. Are Judges Political?: An Empirical Analysis of the Federal Judiciary. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Sutton, John R., and Dobbin, Frank. 1996. The Two Faces of Governance: Responses to Legal Uncertainty in U.S. Firms, 1955 to 1985. American Sociological Review 61 (5):794–811.Google Scholar
Sutton, John R., Frank, Dobbin, Meyer, John W., and Scott, W. Richard. 1994. The Legalization of the Workplace. American Journal of Sociology 99 (4):944–71.Google Scholar
Thornburg, Elizabeth G. 1999. Giving the “Haves” a Little More: Considering the 1998 Discovery Proposals. Southern Methodist University Law Review 52:229–65.Google Scholar
Wahlbeck, Paul J., James, F. Spriggs, and Forrest, Maltzman. 1998. Marshalling the Court: Bargaining and Accommodation on the United States Supreme Court. American Journal of Political Science 42 (1):294–315.Google Scholar
Wald, Patricia M. 1998. Summary Judgment at Sixty. Texas Law Review 76:1897–1945.Google Scholar
Weick, Karl E. 1976. Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems. Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (1):1–19.Google Scholar
Wistrich, Andrew J., Guthrie, Chris, and Rachlinski, Jeffrey J. 2005. Can Judges Ignore Inadmissible Information? The Difficulty of Deliberately Disregarding. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 153 (4):1251–1345.Google Scholar
Yoon, Albert. 2003. Love's Labor's Lost? Judicial Tenure Among Federal Court Judges: 1945–2000. California Law Review 91 (4):1029–60.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986).Google Scholar
Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 764–65 (1998).Google Scholar
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 778, 807–08 (1998).Google Scholar
Furnco Constr. Co. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567, 577 (1978).Google Scholar
Grubb v. W. A. Foote Mem'l Hosp., Inc. 74d1 F.2d 1486 (6th Cir. 1984).Google Scholar
Lacy v. Ameritech, 142 F.3d 440 (7th Cir. 1988).Google Scholar
Leopold v. Baccarat, 82 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas (BNA) 105, 2000 WL 174923 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), aff'd 239 F.3d 243 (2d Cir. 2001).Google Scholar
McDowell v. Mississippi Power & Light, 641 F. Supp. 424 (S. D. Miss. 1986).Google Scholar
Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986).Google Scholar
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (2000).Google Scholar
Schartz v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 512, 953 F. Supp. 1208 (D. Kan. 1997).Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

The Age Discrimination Act of 1967, 29 USCA § 621 et seq. (Pub. L. 90‐202) (ADEA) as amended.Google Scholar
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 USCA § 12101 et seq. (Pub. L. 101‐336) (ADA) as amended.Google Scholar
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 USCA § 1981 (14 Stat. 27‐30) as amended.Google Scholar
The Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 USCA § 1983 (17 Stat. 13).Google Scholar
The Equal Pay Act of 1963, 29 USCA § 621(d) et seq. (Pub. L. 88‐38) (EPA) as amended.Google Scholar
The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 USCA § 2601 (Pub. L. 103‐3) (FMLA).Google Scholar
The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 USCA § 791 et seq. (Pub. L. 93‐112) (Rehab. Act), as amended.Google Scholar
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USCA §§ 2000e et seq. (Pub. L. 88‐352) (Title VII), as amended.Google Scholar