Individual Justice or Collective Legal Mobilization? Employment Discrimination Litigation in the Post Civil Rights United States

Abstract

This article analyzes the outcomes of employment discrimination lawsuits filed in federal court from 1988 to 2003. It goes beyond previous research by examining case filings rather than published opinions and by treating case outcome as a sequential variable. Our analysis is informed by four theoretical models: formal legal, rational action/economic, legal mobilization, and critical realist. We employ a discrete-time event-history model with random effects to estimate whether a case will end at a particular stage. We find that employment discrimination litigation consists overwhelmingly of individual cases, a majority of which end in a small settlement. The outcomes of cases are difficult to predict at the outset of litigation. Legal representation and collective legal mobilization have powerful effects on outcome, but collective legal mobilization is rare. These results are most consistent with the critical realist perspective. Our analysis suggests that employment discrimination litigation maintains law's jurisdiction over claims of workplace discrimination while not providing a significant remedy or an authoritative resolution in most cases.

Untimely Subjects: White Trash and the Making of Racial Innocence in the Postwar South

“…78 On the register offered by both Edstrom and Wray and Newitz, white trash represents an effort to cast racial innocence anew. Suggesting that rights are, in David Roediger's phrase, "lavished upon Blacks," today's white trash fosters an old sense of grievance that they are, and have been, left behind and forgotten as poor whites.…”

Insiders and Outsiders: Does Forbidding Sexual Harassment Exacerbate Gender Inequality?

“…There is an administrative office that sets the baseline number of cases senior judges must hear per term. 51 The effect of 1[M ct > 0] has multiple interpretations. The absence of an appellate decision may be due to a widely publicized pro-plaintiff district court decision.…”

“…57 See Schultz and Petterson (1992) on judicial decisions in employment discrimination. 58 We are focusing on appellate precedent; some papers find no effect of judicial background on civil rights and employment discrimination case outcomes in lower courts (Nielsen, Nelson, andLancaster 2010, Ashenfelter, Eisenberg, andSchwab 1995), where judges may have less discretion in applying appellate precedent.…”

Private Enforcement of Statutory and Administrative Law in the United States (and Other Common Law Countries)

“…46 Nielsen, Nelson, and Lancaster (2010) analyze a large nationwide sample of Title VII cases filed in federal district courts between 1988 and 2003, and they provide a detailed portrait of litigation outcomes. They report that:…”

“…Like exclusive focus on formal legal rules (Nielsen et al 2010), such a frame can obscure the locus of initiation -clients and lawyers --and the impact of incentives on the prospects for initiation. As a result, it may be more difficult to discern what aspects of regulatory design affect the efficacy and durability of the policy sought to be implemented (Farhang 2009;.…”