Defining "Harm" Today Under Title VII

Changing Standards; What's the "Harm" in It?

This blog briefly looks at a recent Supreme Court case and some Fifth Circuit case law redefining what a "discrimination" case might look like – that is, what "harm" is required to be actionable under Title VII—what does "harm" look like? That word, "harm," seems to have a broader meaning today; it does not mean "significant," and it does not have to involve an "ultimate employment decision" to be actionable, though it will not pass muster if considered just "de minimus." In short, what harm is depends on each court's view of discrimination.

Does the Refocus on "Harm" Change the Employer's Decision-Making Process?

• U.S. Supreme Court: Muldrow v. St. Louis – Harm Need Not Be "Significant."