Past disability discrimination rulings set scene for Supreme Court
Reprints
Two U.S. Supreme Court rulings, one more than 40 years old and the other issued less than two years ago, may play a role in determining the court’s ruling on whether a “tester” who did not plan to visit a hotel can pursue her discrimination liability case.
The rulings differ on the issue of whether plaintiffs suffered an injury that enabled them to pursue litigation in federal courts.
The high court’s 1982 ruling in Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman involved a case of “racial steering” in which a black tester — who had no intention of renting or buying a home — was told by an apartment complex owner that no apartments were available, while a white tester was told there were.
In its unanimous ruling, the court said the black tester in the case “alleged injury to her statutorily created right to truthful housing information.”
“If the facts are as alleged, then respondent has suffered ‘specific injury,’” the ruling said.
The Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez in 2021 involved a class of 8,185 individuals who charged that credit reporting agency TransUnion LLC violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to use reasonable procedures to ensure their credit files’ accuracy.
The majority opinion, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, said, “No concrete harm, no standing.”
The ruling said that while 1,853 class members whose credit reports were provided to third-party businesses “have demonstrated concrete reputational harm” and have standing to sue, 6,332 other class members whose credit files were not provided to third-party businesses did not.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said, “TransUnion’s misconduct here is exactly the sort of thing that has long merited legal redress.”
Both cases are discussed in the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in Acheson Hotels LLC v. Deborah Laufer, which the high court recently accepted for review. “We think Havens Realty shows the clear path here … unless the Supreme Court tells us that TransUnion overruled it,” the appeals court ruling said.
