Public Health Consequences of Appellate Standards for Hostile Work Environment Claims
Lauren Krumholz
Abstact
In 2000, the Ninth Circuit set a high bar for plaintiffs bringing hostile work environment sexual harassment cases under Title VII with its decision in Brooks v. City of San Mateo. Over twenty years later, this precedent still prevents plaintiffs who plead single instances of sexual harassment from moving past summary judgment unless they can prove that the incident was “extremely severe.” Workplace sexual harassment is tied to mental and physical health impacts that follow individuals throughout their lives. The Brooks standard perpetuates the public health consequences of sexual harassment, contravening an underlying goal of Title VII: to promote the public’s health. Based on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Title VII and the legislative intent behind the Civil Rights Act, the Ninth Circuit should revise the bar for severity in hostile work environment sexual harassment cases to bring single instances of physical touching within the realm of severe conduct. Longstanding precedent from other federal appellate courts, innovative state law, and proposed federal legislation provide guidance for a new standard that would meet public health needs and allow plaintiffs a meaningful opportunity to vindicate their rights.