More Subjects
Understanding the Court System
[Author’s name]
Understanding the Court System
Introduction
The core aim of the U.S. Court System is to provide necessary legal aid to the citizens at both federal and state-level courts. Legal domains in case of equal employment opportunities are one major concern under the prospect of the U.S. Constitution. There are examples of many legal cases that focus on the issue of equal employment level for all without any discrimination. It is worthy to consider one specific legal case to understand better the legal foundations in case of employment structures prevails in the country. Here, the specific legal case of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green is selected to critically analyze different legal perspectives of this case to understand the complex legal system of the country better.
Discussion
The first step of the critical analysis of the case is to summarize the seminal facts of the case to figure out the overall legal position of this specific case. McDonnell Douglas Corp. and Green were the direct stakeholders involve in this legal case. Green, a Black individual who was the plaintiff of this case. He had been employed by McDonnell Douglas Corp. which recognized as the defendant in this particular case scenario. Historical domains of this case revealed that Green participated in a protest against the issue of racial discrimination. This particular step by Green ultimately causes the loss of job for him. Later, Green again applied for an open mechanic position in the same organization and was rejected by the management of McDonnell Douglas Corp. The organization of McDonnell Douglas was sued by Green with the allegation that the company refused to recruit him for the job position of mechanic due to the discriminatory aspect of the race and his involvement in the civil rights activities. It is crucial to mention that Green filed a legal case against McDonnell Corp. under the constitutional domain of employment rights for everyone.
Comprehensive consideration of this case revealed that the main legal form of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 1964 in the form of equal employment opportunities for all citizens have been violated. 703(a)(1) and 704(a) under the legal domain of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act are the main forms of laws involved in case of the considered legal case of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green. Proper knowledge about the law of equal rights of employment applied in the country also guides to identify the penalties associated with this particular perspective. Possible forfeits in case of non-compliance can are observed in different forms according to the actual nature of the case. There is the possibility that workers may seek a jury trial with the consideration of the factor of compensation according to the seriousness of the issue and the size of the corporation.
It is vital to indicate that the particular case of McDonnell Douglas was closely linked with both the prospects of state and federal court system as initially it was heard by the district court. The role of the federal court system can also never ignore because the petition filed by Green eventually review by United States Supreme Court (Hedican, Hedican, & Hudson, 2003). Detailed understanding of the district court and the appeal court is essential to assess each aspect of this case of equal employment for every individual without any form of discrimination. Additionally, consideration of both the courts was essential because the decisions of both the courts of the district court and the court of review petition were different. The application of review by Green made it essential in the form of jurisdiction requirements to refer this case to the court of petition review.
Identification of the basic reasons is also vital that why it was necessary for the case to be heard in the district courts and the court of appeals. The critical involvement of the element of racial discrimination in employment eventually made this case as the complex legal paradigm. At the initial steps, the district court heard this case and only consider one angle of the case in the form of Green’s involvement in the form of illegal involvement of Green in the protest against the company. Later, the decision of district court challenged by Green in a court of Appeal. The legal approach of this platform was different as compared to the district court. The dismissal by district court reversed by the United States Court of Appeals. Furthermore, the involvement of the United States Supreme Court also needs to be considered because the organization of McDonnell Douglas filed a petition for evaluation in the highest court of the country. Deep understanding of different patterns of the judicial system of the country reveals that the involvement of different levels of the court system is essential because court decision was challenged by both the parties. Active involvement of different layers of the judicial system of the country eventually made it easy to examine the different aspects of the entire case.
Proper understanding of the entire case can never consider complete without the critical analysis of the actual outcome of the case. Assessment of the outcome provides the chance to evaluate the different aspects of the case on legal grounds. Detailed exploration of the outcome of the McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green’s legal case is also essential to identify the actual implications of the final verdict given by the United States Supreme Court. It is observed that the approach of equal employment opportunities for everyone is mainly acknowledged by the decision-makers in the form of the final outcome of this case (Sperino, 2013).
It is notable to mention that Percy Green involvement in the protest was the basic reason behind his dismissal from the McDonnell Douglas Corporation. McDonnell Douglas Corporation dismissed Green and advertised for qualified mechanics. Green decided to sue the McDonnell Douglas Corporation by applying a case in the district. His main arguments about his dismissal included his race and civil rights activism. Upon hearing in the district court, the charges of racial discrimination were dismissed against McDonnell Douglas Corporation. The district court held the decision of McDonnell Douglas Corporation not to rehire Green (Oppenheimer, 2002). It is notable to mention that the district court argued that the involvement in the illegal protest against any corporation is a serious crime. Based on these illegal demonstrations, Green was refused to rehire by McDonnell Douglas Corporation and all charges of racial discrimination were dismissed. The district court made it clear that his dismissal was not some sort of legitimate civil rights issues. His dismissal by McDonnell Douglas Corporation was completely based on his illegal protest against this corporation. After getting no positive response from the district court, Green decided to file his case in the US Supreme Court. It is notable to mention that the US Supreme Court thoroughly examine the entire scenario and concluded that illegal protests were not protected activities. The US Supreme Court held the decision by stating that McDonnell Douglas Corporation had the right to dismiss Green due to his involvement in illegal activities. However, the US Supreme Court remanded the case to reconsider the charges of racial discrimination against Green. After a thorough examination of the entire case and involvement of other individuals in the illegal protest, it was observed that Green became the victim of racial discrimination as his other white fellows who were involved in the same illegal protests were not dismissed from the office. Therefore, the US Supreme Court charged McDonnell Douglas Corporation with racial discrimination and ordered them to rehired Green in his previous position.
The analysis of the entire case can never rank complete without the evaluation of the actual justification of the case. The final verdict given by the supreme court of the country can consider establishing a better understanding of the entire case. The initial decision of the case differed from the final approach of equal employment rights considered by the jury members of the Supreme Court. Assessment of different prospects of the case eventually helps to accept that the final outcome of this case is justified under the domain of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act established in the country. This specific case is one good example to understand the perspective of diversity in the scenario of equal employment rights for everyone without considering their particular race.
Understanding of the entire case scenario revealed that the discharge of Green from the company is the result of the racial motivation by the management of the company. The active role of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) also established in this specific case by assessing the factor of equal employment rights for all the citizens. At the original steps, it is established by EEOC that there is no evidence of the racial bias in the case of Green. Furthermore, the outcomes of this case are justified considering the importance of 704(a). Conclusion
In a nutshell, it is vital to mention that the particular case of McDonnell Douglas v. Green have a great impact for the society when it comes to the understanding of the approach of unbiased employment rights for all the workers. The verdict of the court ultimately helps to figure out that the legal perspective of the country provides the necessary support to the workers in case of concern of the racial problems.
References
Green v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 463 F.2d 337 (8th Cir. 1972).
Hedican, C. R., Hedican, J. M., & Hudson, M. (2003). McDonnell Douglas: Alive and Well. Drake L. Rev., 52, 383.
Oppenheimer, D. B. (2002). McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green Revisited: Why Non-Violent Civil Disobedience Should Be Protected from Retaliation by Title VII. Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev., 34, 635.
Sperino, S. F. (2013). Beyond McDonnell Douglas. Berkeley J. Emp. & Lab. L., 34, 257.
More Subjects
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2024