Supreme Court Update: Muldrow v. St. Louis

Author

Image of Rachel-Mackey_v2.png

Rachel Mackey

Legislative Director – Human Services & Education | Veterans & Military Services

Upcoming Events

Related News

Image of police-car_stock_2400.jpg

Supreme Court Update:  Muldrow v. St. Louis

COUNTY NEXUS

In a season of acute workforce shortages, the ability to make lateral transfers without fear of legal action is an important tool for county governments to ensure we have appropriate staffing to meet our various responsibilities for safeguarding the safety, health and wellbeing of our residents.

BACKGROUND

In this case, an employee alleged that her lateral transfer within the St. Louis Police Department was motivated by gender bias and constituted discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. However, the transfer did not impact her pay or title. This case involved a circuit split over the question of whether lateral employment transfers constitute an adverse employment action or if tangible harm must be evident.

NACo ADVOCACY

In a Local Government Legal Center amicus brief submitted in support of the respondents, NACo argued that local governments are collectively among the largest employers in the country and regularly transfer employees laterally as a matter of operational necessity, to provide training, to fill critical service needs, to accommodate an employee’s religious or disability needs, to investigate a claim of harassment, and to address staffing shortages. We suggested a ruling allowing all lateral transfers, regardless of associated material harm, to qualify as actionable adverse employment actions could profoundly impede the ability of local governments to assign police, fire, and EMS personnel where they are most needed.

CURRENT STATUS

On April 17, the Court issued a 6-3 decision vacating the lower court's ruling against the petitioner and creating a new standard under Title VII for lawsuits related to forced employee transfers. An employee must demonstrate "some harm" in a forced transfer suit, which is a lower threshold than the "material" or "significant" harm adopted by many lower courts. However, the Court did not go so far as to adopt the Petitioner’s proposed rule that any transfer, regardless of harm would be actionable under Title VII if based on a protected characteristic. Learn more here.

2023-2024 Supreme Court Term

Fishing boat
Advocacy

U.S. Supreme Court overturns the Chevron doctrine to reshape the federal administrative state

In major ruling, U.S. Supreme Court overturns longstanding precedent deferring to federal agency interpretation of ambiguous statute.

Image of Opioid-pills_4.jpg
Advocacy

U.S. Supreme Court decision halts Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

Supreme Court ruling upends $6 billion settlement agreement between Purdue Pharma and impacted state, county and tribal governments and residents.

Image of LACounty-Homelessness_vidthumb.jpg
Advocacy

U.S. Supreme Court protects key flexibility for county governments responding to homelessness

On June 28, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling in Grants Pass v. Johnson, a case of major significance for counties working to develop comprehensive responses to the homelessness crisis.

Image of Courtroom.jpg
Advocacy

U.S. Supreme Court issues narrow decision in malicious prosecution case

On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling in Chiaverini v. Ohio, a case focused on the relationship between probable cause and malicious prosecution claims against local government.

Image of police.jpg
Advocacy

U.S. Supreme Court ruling may increase counties' exposure to retaliatory arrest claims

On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a per curiam (unauthored) ruling in Gonzalez v. Trevino, a case with implications for retaliatory arrest claims against local law enforcement.

Image of police-car_stock_2400.jpg
Advocacy

U.S. Supreme Court ruling may increase counties' legal liability when transferring employees

New test established by the Supreme Court will allow employees demonstrating "some harm" from an unwanted transfer to file a civil rights lawsuit.

Image of Courtroom.jpg
Advocacy

Supreme Court Update: Chiaverini vs. City of Napoleon

The county perspective on a case involving malicious prosecution

Image of GettyImages-586718274.jpg
Advocacy

Supreme Court Update: Gonzalez v. Trevino

The county perspective on a case involving retaliatory arrests

Image of LACounty-Homelessness_vidthumb.jpg
Advocacy

Supreme Court Update: City of Grants Pass v. Gloria Johnson

The county perspective on a case related to the constitutionality of certain local anti-encampment ordinances 

1456277065_smaller
Advocacy

Supreme Court Update: Sheetz v. El Dorado County

The county perspective on a case involving the constitutionality of legislative enacted, generally applicable impact fees for new development

Image of police-car_stock_2400.jpg
Advocacy

Supreme Court Update: Muldrow v. St. Louis

The county perspective in a case concerning discrimination claims in lateral employment transfers

Image of smart-phones-stock.png
Advocacy

Supreme Court Update: Lindke v. Freed/O'Connor Ratcliff v. Garnier

The county perspective on a case related to public officials' use of personal social media accounts