NT Lakis lawyers have filed a “friend-of-the-court” brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in yet another case that raises important questions regarding the statutory duty of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to investigate discrimination charges brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 before bringing a lawsuit.
Our brief in Sterling Jewelers, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 15-1329 (U.S. May 31, 2016), joined by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) and the Retail Litigation Center (RLC), urges the High Court to review and reverse a troubling decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that misconstrued the Supreme Court’s decision last year in Mach Mining v. EEOC, and thus allowed the EEOC to sue for nationwide, pattern-or-practice sex discrimination, even though the agency never conducted an investigation of these claims.
We contend that the appeals court illogically applied Title VII conciliation principles to EEOC charge investigations, in essence relieving the agency of any meaningful obligation to ensure that every Title VII lawsuit it files is preceded by a proper and reasonable investigation. In particular, we point out that while the EEOC has considerable leeway under Title VII regarding whether, and to what extent, to conciliate, the same is not true with respect to its duty to investigate — which is mandatory and unequivocal.
A copy of the brief is available here.
Members of the Equal Employment Advisory Council (EEAC) can read more here.