Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Employment — race discrimination — state actors

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 16, 2014//

Employment — race discrimination — state actors

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 16, 2014//

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Civil

Employment — race discrimination — state actors

42 U.S.C. 1981 does not create a private right of action against state actors.

“[T]he legislative history reveals that subsection (c) was intended not to overrule Jett but ‘to codify [Runyon], in which the Supreme Court held that § 1981 prohibited intentional racial discrimination in private, as well as public, contracting.’ McGovern v. City of Philadelphia, 554 F.3d 114, 120 (3d Cir. 2009). Congress was apparently responding to Patterson, in which the Court questioned Runyon’s correctness and adhered to it only out of respect for the principle of stare decisis. See id. (‘Wary of the fact that future courts might not employ the principle of stare decisis, Congress established § 1981(c) to codify the holding of Runyon.’). ‘Nothing in the 1991 amendments or its legislative history evinces Congress’s desire to alter the Supreme Court’s conclusion in Jett, nor was Jett even mentioned despite the fact that it was decided [only] two years before Congress enacted the 1991 Act.’ Id.”

Affirmed.

13-3147 Campbell v. Forest Preserve District of Cook County, Illinois

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Durkin, J., Tinder, J.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests