The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Granted: Monday, May 16, 2005
Argument: Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Decision: Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Issues: Civil Rights, Sex Discrimination in Employment

Advocates

Brett John Prendergast (argued the cause for Respondent)
Jeffrey A. Schwartz (argued the cause for Petitioner)
Daryl Joseffer (argued the cause for Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

Jennifer Arbaugh, a waitress at the Moonlight Cafe in Louisiana, sued her employer, the Y&H Corporation, for sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The federal district court jury ruled for Arbaugh. Filing a motion to dismiss, Y&H claimed it did not qualify as an employer under Title VII, because it did not employ 15 or more employees for 20 or more calendar weeks during the relevant time period. The district court then reversed the jury judgment, holding that the number of employees determines a court's subject matter jurisdiction in a Title VII suit. The Fifth Circuit affirmed.

Question

Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act applied the prohibition of employment discrimination to employers with fifteen or more employees. Did this limit federal courts' subject matter jurisdiction, or did it only raise an issue going to the merits of a Title VII claim?

Conclusion

The Court held that the number-of-employees requirement is an element of the merits of a Title VII claim, not a jurisdictional limitation. The 8-0 opinion (Justice Alito not participating) by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg reversed the Circuit Court, noting the "unfair[ness]" and "waste of judicial resources" that could result from a jurisdictional interpretation of the number-of-employees requirement as well as the lack of any specific jurisdictional language that would require such an interpretation. The Court relied on a "readily administrable bright line" rule that statutory limitations should be treated as non-jurisdictional unless specified as jurisdictional by Congress.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 8 votes for Arbaugh, 0 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII
Did not participate
Alito
Voted with the majority
Roberts
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Wrote the majority opinion
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Full Opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. ___ (2006),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2005/2005_04_944/>
(last visited ).