Why are damages for civil suits so low? That is the question. In the era of the #MeToo movement, with overwhelming accounts of sexual harassment at the hands of abusers in places of employment, the Title VII statutory cap for compensatory and punitive damages fails to adequately deter sexual predators, improve employer responses to complaints, or even to make sexual harassment victims whole. The caps a plaintiff can recover under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act remain stagnant, untouched even to account for inflation, since put into place thirty years ago. Of the various recommendations currently in play to initiate workplace and civil rights reform, to provide a meaningful path to justice, repealing the antiquated caps is both necessary and belated.

While numerous victims have come forward during the #MeToo movement, the path to legal justice remains an excruciating multi-year process as the hope for victims to be compensated for their emotional distress and to punish a wrongdoing employer stay "capped" as a result of compromises made by the legislature several years ago with the Civil Rights Act of 1991. 42 U.S.C. §1981a(b)(3). With the volume of accounts of sexual harassment that came to light with the #MeToo movement, including recent allegations against Gov. Andrew Cuomo in New York state, the number of legal claims filed in U.S. district courts pales in comparison. One of many issues that may be an easy fix is to repeal Title VII statutory caps.

Currently, the amount of compensatory and punitive damages awarded to a sexual harassment plaintiff cannot exceed certain arbitrary amounts, which are dependent on the size of the employer being sued: For an employer with 15-100 employees $50,000; 101-200 employees $100,000; 201-500 employees $200,000; and 501 or more employees $300,000. Id. While these caps do not include front pay and back pay, both compensatory and punitive damages are encompassed by the cap. Compensatory and punitive damages provide a source of relief for sexual harassment victims that comprises a significant portion of jury verdicts, but such awards have been reduced by courts, required to comply with these statutory damage caps.