Employment — age discrimination — civil rights actions

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Employment — age discrimination — civil rights actions

The ADEA does not preclude civil rights actions alleging age discrimination.

“[A]s a practical matter in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Kimel, state employees suing under the ADEA are left without a damages remedy, as such claims are barred by Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. 528 U.S. at 91-92. In contrast, ‘[m]unicipalities do not enjoy any kind of immunity from suits for damages under § 1983.’ Benedix v. Vill. of Hanover Park, Ill., 677 F.3d 317, 318-19 (7th Cir. 2012) (citing Owen v. City of Independence, Mo., 445 U.S. 622 (1980)). Without the availability of a § 1983 claim, a state employee (like Levin) who suffers age discrimination in the course of his employment is left without a federal damages remedy. See Mustafa, 196 F. Supp. 2d at 955 (‘[T]he practical effect [of ADEA preclusion] is elimination of all age discrimination claims made against state actors in federal court.’).”

Affirmed.

11-2820 Levin v. Madigan

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Chang, J., Kanne, J.