Covering_ The Hidden Assault on American Civil Rights - Kenji Yoshino [114]
56 In Dillon v. Frank Dillon v. Frank, 952 F.2d 403, 1992 WL 5436 (6th Cir. Jan. 15, 1992).
57 Dillon claimed that Ibid., p. *5.
58 In rejecting Dillon’s argument Ibid., p. *10.
59 The plurality notes that Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. at 251.
60 In a more recent case In Nichols v. Azteca, a male employee alleged he was harassed by his male coworkers and supervisor because he did not conform to a male stereotype. The court agreed with the employee’s contention “that the holding in Price Waterhouse applies with equal force to a man who is discriminated against for acting too feminine.” Nichols v. Azteca Restaurant Enterprises, Inc., 256 F.3d 864 (9th Cir. 2001). In a subsequent case, the same court held that sexual harassment of an employee on the basis of sexual orientation violated Title VII; a concurring opinion argued that the case was one of “gender stereotyping harassment” and was strikingly similar to Nichols. Rene v. MGM Grand Hotel, Inc., 305 F.3d 1061, 1068 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc) (Pregerson, J., concurring).
61 In 2004, an appellate court Jespersen v. Harrah’s Operating Co., 392 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2004), reh’g granted, 409 F.3d 1061 (2005).
62 Darlene Jespersen, who began Ibid., p. 1077.
63 In 2000, Harrah’s implemented Ibid., p. 1078.
64 Under the Personal Best program Ibid., p. 1077.
65 Later that year, Harrah’s Ibid., p. 1078 n. 2.
66 The district court rejected Jespersen v. Harrah’s Operating Co., 280 F. Supp. 2d 1189 (D. Nev. 2002); Jespersen, 392 F.3d 1076.
67 As the dissenting judge Jespersen, 392 F.3d at 1084 (Thomas, J., dissenting).
68 Male beverage servers were Ibid., p. 1077.
69 The majority disagrees, asserting Ibid., p. 1082.
70 The Price Waterhouse decision Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. at 235.
71 As law professor Catharine MacKinnon Catharine A. MacKinnon, “Reflections on Sex Equality Under Law,” Yale Law Journal 100 (March 1991): 1292 n. 50.
72 Law professor Mary Anne Case Mary Anne C. Case, “Disaggregating Gender from Sex and Sexual Orientation: The Effeminate Man in the Law and Feminist Jurisprudence,” Yale Law Journal 105 (October 1995): 1–105.
73 In 1987, the Seventh Circuit Wislocki-Goin v. Mears, 831 F.2d 1374 (7th Cir. 1987).
74 It was uncontested Ibid.
75 in 1983, Wislocki-Goin In addition to wearing her hair down and wearing excessive makeup, Wislocki-Goin cried during the deposition hearing of a disturbed juvenile and, for a Christmas party, wrote a “Dear Santa” letter that Judge Mears considered offensive. Ibid., p. 1377.
76 As Joan Williams Williams and Segal, “Beyond the Maternal Wall,” p. 88.
77 Indeed, as my students Jennifer A. Kingson, “Women in the Law Say Path Is Limited by ‘Mommy Track,’ ” New York Times, August 8, 1988, p. A1.
78 A related article describes Mary C. Hickey, “The Dilemma of Having It All,” Washington Lawyer, May/June 1988, p. 59.
79 The Supreme Court delivered Geduldig v. Aiello, 417 U.S. 484 (1974).
80 The Court held that discrimination Ibid., p. 496.
81 As law professor Dan Danielsen Dan Danielsen, “Representing Identities: Legal Treatment of Pregnancy and Homosexuality,” New England Law Review 26 (summer 1992): 1458.
82 By passing the Pregnancy Discrimination Act Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, U.S. Code 42 (2000), § 2000e(k).
83 Courts have gone both ways Cases in which courts have held that discrimination against mothers is sex discrimination include Santiago-Ramos v. Centennial P.R. Wireless Corp., 217 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 2000); Sheehan v. Donlen Corp., 173 F.3d 1039 (7th Cir. 1999); Coble v. Hot Springs School District No. 6, 682 F.2d 721 (8th Cir. 1982); Harper v. Thiokol Chemical Corp., 619 F.2d 489 (5th Cir. 1980); Moore v. Alabama State University, 980 F. Supp. 426 (M.D.Ala. 1997); and Trezza v. The Hartford, Inc., No. 98 Civ. 2205, 1998 WL 912101 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 30, 1998). Cases in which courts have held that discrimination against mothers is not sex discrimination include Piantanida v. Wyman Center, Inc., 116 F.3d 340 (8th Cir. 1997); Troupe v. May Department Store, 20 F.3d 734 (7th Cir. 1994); Maganuco