Footnotes (241)



Plausibility & Disparate Impact

Joseph Seiner

University of South Carolina School of Law

February 1, 2013

64 Hastings L.J. 287 (2013)

In Twombly v. Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. 644 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009), the Supreme Court introduced a new plausibility pleading standard, abrogating well-established precedent. Under this standard, a plaintiff must now allege enough facts in the complaint to state a plausible claim to relief. Twombly and Iqbal transformed civil procedure law, and both the courts and litigants have struggled with its meaning. One area that has been dramatically affected by these recent decisions is the field of workplace discrimination.

There are two types of employment discrimination claims – intentional (or disparate treatment) and unintentional (or disparate impact) discrimination. The academic scholarship is replete with discussions of the problems that the plausibility standard has created for victims alleging disparate treatment claims. Discriminatory intent is difficult to establish, and this is particularly true where a plaintiff has not had access to discovery.

One area that has remained unexplored in the academic literature, however, is the effect of Twombly and Iqbal on disparate impact cases. This Article seeks to fill that void in the scholarship. This paper closely examines the two most likely approaches for applying the plausibility standard to unintentional discrimination claims. This paper offers an analytical framework for considering these claims under either standard, and explains why a more streamlined approach to the Supreme Court’s recent decisions is preferable.

Navigating Twombly, Iqbal and other Supreme Court decisions, this paper explains how the plausibility standard should be applied to unintentional discrimination cases. This Article provides a blueprint for the courts and litigants to follow when considering a disparate impact claim, and addresses the implications of adopting the proposed approach. Twombly and Iqbal represent a sea change for workplace plaintiffs, and this Article attempts – for the first time – to make sense of these decisions in one of the most complex areas of employment discrimination law.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 38

Keywords: Twombly, Iqbal, disparate impact, discrimination

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: April 12, 2012 ; Last revised: February 28, 2013

Suggested Citation

Seiner, Joseph, Plausibility & Disparate Impact (February 1, 2013). 64 Hastings L.J. 287 (2013). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2038897

Contact Information

Joseph A. Seiner (Contact Author)
University of South Carolina School of Law ( email )
Main & Greene Streets
Columbia, SC 29208
United States
(803) 777-5569 (Phone)
(803) 777-2368 (Fax)
HOME PAGE: http://www.law.sc.edu/faculty/seiner/
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 464
Downloads: 79
Download Rank: 202,450
Footnotes:  241

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.312 seconds