Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
575 U.S. 768 · 2015
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 20 district · 10 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981A · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney · United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. · General Electric Co. v. Gilbert · Ricci v. DeStefano
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 124 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual ... because of such individual's”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“These proscriptions often referred to as the 'disparate treatment' (or 'intentional discrimination') provision and the 'disparate impact' provision, are the only causes of action under Title VII.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.