Ruth Bader Ginsburg: She's Come a Long Way, Baby!
Justice Ginsburg's powerful dissent in the Ledbetter case explained how companies can hide gender salary discrepancies, and she argued that no time limit should have applied to Ledbetter's claims of unequal treatment.
August 02, 2018 at 06:13 PM
4 minute read
Leah Ward Sears (Photo: John Disney/ALM)
As a fan of justice and equality, I was happy to hear recently that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg intends to remain on the bench for at least five more years. She even has her law clerks in place for the next two terms. At the age of 85, Justice Ginsburg still has a great deal to teach us through her rulings and opinions, especially when it comes to gender rights. Indeed, I believe that one of Justice Ginsburg's greatest contributions to the Supreme Court—and to American life in general—is her deep and personal understanding of how the law affects women, a group that obviously makes up half of the country's population. If Justice Ginsburg had retired this year, we would have lost her unique and vital perspective. While it goes without saying that men and younger women can make excellent judges (I was one such judge at a point in my life), such individuals haven't navigated intense gender discrimination in quite the same way that Justice Ginsburg has for decades. Facing Inequity Head-On Justice Ginsburg has been candid about the sexism and sexual harassment she's dealt with over the years. When she was an undergraduate at Cornell University, a chemistry professor implied that he would give her answers to an exam in exchange for sexual favors. When she was studying at Harvard Law School, a number of male students and administrators criticized her just for being there. They felt that her position in the class should have gone to a man. During the 1960s, it was hard for Justice Ginsburg to find a job as a law clerk because she was a woman. Later on, when she sought a position at a law firm, the salaries she was offered were significantly less than the salaries male applicants were offered. Deciding in Favor of Equal Rights Fortunately for all of us, Justice Ginsburg has been able to make various forms of gender discrimination illegal. Let's consider just two of her major rulings. In 1996, the United States sued the Virginia Military Institute because it wouldn't admit women. The college's position was that women weren't capable of completing its training programs. Justice Ginsburg authored the majority opinion that forced the Institute to accept female candidates, stating that the Constitution guarantees equality between men and women. In 2007, Justice Ginsburg wrote the minority opinion in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. That case involved a Goodyear night manager named Lilly Ledbetter who discovered, late in her career, that she was earning much less than the men who held the same position at the company. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled against Ledbetter due to a technicality. They said she waited too long to file her lawsuit. However, Justice Ginsburg's powerful dissent explained how companies can hide gender salary discrepancies, and she argued that no time limit should have applied to Ledbetter. Although she lost that case, Justice Ginsburg won a major victory in the end. In 2009, President Barack Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. It eased the statute of limitations for lawsuits related to gender pay discrimination. A Magnificent Career and a Terrific Role Model Women in America and around the world still face challenges and biases that men don't. It's a basic fact. And I know that only women can really feel the burden of overcoming those hurdles. Justice Ginsburg, over the course of a long and fruitful career, has given our nation a vivid understanding of these social problems. Simply put, she's a wife—now a widow—and a mother whose decisions have helped pave the way for generations of women to succeed at work. For that reason, among many others, I believe Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been a particularly wise and valuable jurist. Long may she rule! Leah Ward Sears is a former chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court and is a partner at Smith, Gambrell & Russell.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBusiness Breakups: Why Business and Commercial Cases Are Well-Suited to Mediation
5 minute readIn RE: Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation
Trending Stories
- 1'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
- 2Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Match Group's Katie Dugan & Herrick's Carol Goodman
- 3Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Eric Wall, Executive VP, Syllo
- 4Battle for Top Talent Accelerates Amid Profit and Demand Surge
- 5Friday Newspaper
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250