Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Janice Hargrove Warren v. Mike Kemp, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 22-2067, 22-2169 · judgment August 22, 2023
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a circuit split argued in the petition, an Eighth Circuit decision below, and a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition).
Question presented
Under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2, an employer who discriminates on compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of race, religion, sex, or national origin engages in an unlawful employment practice. The Eighth Circuit held contrary to its precedent and the holdings of the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits that conditions of employment have nothing to do with facilities. Assuming discriminatory facilities are lawful, an employee who opposes her employer’s provision of discriminatory facilities based on race or sex is shielded from retaliation pursuant to Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3, if she believes she is opposing an unlawful employment practice. Unlike the majority of its sister Circuits, contrary to Eighth Circuit precedent, and this Court’s perspective in Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53, 126 S.Ct. 2405, 2414 (2006), the Eighth Circuit ruled that the test of the employee’s belief is subjective, determined by the employee’s testimony regarding her belief. QUESTIONS PRESENTED A. Is providing undisputedly inferior working conditions or facilities based on the race or sex of its employees an unlawful employment practice? B. If providing inferior working conditions based on race or sex violates Title VII, is the employer only prohibited from discriminating concerning facilities affecting the core functions of the job, or are comparable privileges and benefits such as tools, equipment, breakrooms, and offices also within the scope of Title VII?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Sarah Howard Jenkins
Sarah Howard Jenkins, PLLC
For respondent
William Cody Kees
Bequette, Billingsley & Kees, P.A.
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Feb 26 2024Petition DENIED.
- Feb 07 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2024.
- Jan 30 2024Waiver of right of respondent Mike Kemp, et al. to respond filed.
- Jan 03 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 5, 2024)