Employment Law
Pub.L. 102–166, 105 Stat. 1071
Study notes for the Civil Rights Act of 1991: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.
The Civil Rights Act of 1991 expands legal remedies for employment discrimination under Title VII, including jury trials and punitive damages.
The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was a critical legislative response to a series of Supreme Court decisions that had limited the scope of remedies available for victims of employment discrimination under Title VII. Particularly, this Act allowed plaintiffs to seek compensatory and punitive damages, and it reaffirmed the right to a jury trial, which had been challenged previously. Professors emphasize the importance of this Act in re-establishing the effectiveness of civil rights protections and how it serves as a pivotal point for future employment discrimination litigation.
Furthermore, the Act embodies Congress's commitment to combat discrimination and underscores the legal framework that supports the advancement of civil rights in the workplace. By enhancing available remedies, the Act encourages individuals to pursue claims against discrimination and ensures that those found liable face significant financial consequences, potentially deterring discriminatory practices across industries.
Jams Up Discrimination: Jury trials and punitive damages expand remedies.
| Case | Distinction |
|---|---|
| Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson | Meritor involved the recognition of hostile work environment claims under Title VII, whereas the 1991 Act explicitly expanded remedies rather than defining new types. |
| Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins | Price Waterhouse focused on mixing standards of proof (mixed-motive) for discrimination, while the 1991 Act clarified and expanded available damages for all plaintiffs. |
| Faragher v. City of Boca Raton | Faragher addressed employer liability for harassment, and while related, it did not include the significant remedy expansions introduced by the 1991 Act. |
The expansion of remedies serves as a powerful deterrent against workplace discrimination, encouraging a more equitable and respectful workplace.
Critics argue that the potential for large punitive damages could lead to frivolous lawsuits and create an overly litigious environment for employers.
This Act is often featured in exams as a key legislative measure that transformed remedies for employment discrimination, particularly regarding damages and the right to a jury trial. Students should be prepared to discuss the implications of the Act and its historical context.