Kimel and Garrett: Another Example of the Court Undervaluing Individual Sovereignty and Settled Expectations

32 Pages Posted: 17 Feb 2011 Last revised: 10 Mar 2011

Date Written: January 1, 2004

Abstract

Federal employment discrimination law has become the primary vehicle by which individuals pursue relief from discrimination in employment. For four decades federal legislation has provided a uniform system of rights and remedies, one that the Supreme Court has very recently fundamentally altered. Individuals have come to expect national protection from discrimination in employment based upon race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, and disability, and there exists no good reason, constitutional or otherwise, for undermining this settled expectation for two sources of protection - disability and age. Certainly, a justification grounded in state sovereignty should not disturb these settled expectations around which people have ordered their lives. The need to exercise judicial restraint is especially critical when the Court is so bitterly yet so closely divided upon the issue of state sovereignty and when the legislation it thwarts prohibits the states in their capacity as employers from practicing invidious discrimination against individuals based upon traits or characteristics essentially unrelated to the ability to perform a job.

Keywords: employment discrimination, eleventh amendment, ADA, ADEA, age discrimination, disability discrimination, state as employer

Suggested Citation

Spanbauer, Julie M., Kimel and Garrett: Another Example of the Court Undervaluing Individual Sovereignty and Settled Expectations (January 1, 2004). Temple Law Review, Vol. 76, No.4, 2004, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1762210

Julie M. Spanbauer (Contact Author)

The John Marshall Law School ( email )

315 South Plymouth Court
Chicago, IL 60604
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
33
Abstract Views
428
PlumX Metrics