Sotomayor’s Second Circuit Decisions on Discrimination Under Title VII

Only one Second Circuit decision authored by Judge Sonia Sotomayor falls within the traditional category of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This is another decision demonstrating Sotomayor’s attention to specific facts and the law’s specific parameters.

Williams v. R.H. Donnelley Corp., 368 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2004)
A female African-American had received several promotions in her employer’s Las Vegas office. Her last promotion (which she voluntarily accepted) required her to move to her employer’s office in Purchase, New York. After 10 months on the job, the employee wanted to return to Las Vegas where she still owned a house. She began applying for positions there and even requested that a position be created for her. The employer refused all requests. She filed suit claiming sex discrimination and race discrimination under Title VII. The district court dismissed her claims.

When the case was appealed to the Second Circuit, Judge Sotomayor ticked off each request the employee had made. The employee asked to be promoted to the position of account manager, but by her own admission, she wasn’t qualified for the job. She claimed that white males had been given similar jobs without the proper qualifications, but the only evidence supported a contrary finding.

The employee asked her employer to create a position in Las Vegas for her. According to Sotomayor, the employer had no obligation to do that, and the employee had no proof that the employer had created positions for similarly situated white males.

The employee asked to be returned to the job she formerly held in Las Vegas. The employer’s failure to do so couldn’t constitute discrimination, said Sotomayor, because the failure to grant a lateral transfer didn’t constitute an adverse employment action.

The employee sought a promotion to a DSM III position. The employer’s denial of the promotion was justified because the job required two years of experience as a DSM II, a position the employee had never held.

The employee asked for a promotion to a DSM II position. This request was denied by her employer for two reasons. First, there were legitimate questions about her meeting the qualifications for the job. Second, the employee had taken an indefinite leave of absence as a result of being so stressed out over her inability to get back to Las Vegas. When she sought the DSM II job, she was still on the indefinite leave with no indication as to when she would return and was, thus, not available for the job even if she were qualified.

The employee wanted to return to Las Vegas and was upset that her employer wouldn’t cooperate. The problem for the employee’s lawsuit, ruled Sotomayor, was that she had no proof of race or sex discrimination. The employer had denied her requests for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons, and Sotomayor agreed with the lower court that all the employee’s claims should be dismissed.

Summary of Sotomayor’s Decision in the Title VII Discrimination Case
This discrimination case was pretty straightforward. It contained no nuanced questions. It also contained no evidence of unlawful discrimination. Judge Sotomayor’s approach to this case conforms to the approach any judge would have taken under the circumstances.

Next, we’ll look at Sotomayor’s Second Circuit decisions under the Americans with Disabilities Act.