Cross-posted at PointofLaw.com.
Hans Bader of the Competitive Enterprise Institute takes a look at today’s Washington Post editorial, “Fair Pay, Fair Play,” calling for passage of the Ledbatter Fair Pay Act, and finds certain facts and legal context missing. Again. From the Open Market blog:
The Post seems completely unaware of the existence of another law, the Equal Pay Act, that already has a generous deadline (3 years) for bringing pay discrimination claims.
In Ledbetter v. Goodyear (2007), the Supreme Court enforced the explicit 180-day deadline for bringing discrimination claims under Title VII, ruling that Lilly Ledbetter’s pay discrimination suit under Title VII was untimely because she brought it long after 180 days had elapsed. But the court specifically noted in a footnote that the plaintiff had (for unknown reasons) dropped her claim under the Equal Pay Act — which has a longer deadline (3 years) for suing. Liberal court reporters deliberately ignored the footnote and the very existence of the Equal Pay Act in order to cynically create the false impression that the Supreme Court’s enforcing the Title VII deadline as written would leave women without any redress for sex-based pay discrimination after 180 days had passed.
Good legal issues to discuss once the Senate takes up the bill.
As for the political context, from FoxNews.com, “McConnell Complains About Delay in Senate Vote So Candidates Can Return.” From the minority leader:
Now, look, we understand people have to run for president and are not likely to be here much of the time. But to have the schedule of the Senate completely revolve around the schedule of the Democratic presidential candidates strikes me as particularly ridiculous.
Latest posts by NAM (see all)
- Manufacturers Win Several Website Design Awards - June 15, 2011
- China Makes Commitments on Trade, Intellectual Property - December 16, 2010
- ITC Details Widespread Theft of Intellectual Property in China - December 14, 2010