Sunday, 15 Jun 2025
America Age
  • Trending
  • World
  • Politics
  • Opinion
  • Business
    • Economy
    • Real Estate
    • Money
    • Crypto & NFTs
  • Tech
  • Lifestyle
    • Lifestyle
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Fashion / Beauty
    • Art & Books
    • Culture
  • Health
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
Font ResizerAa
America AgeAmerica Age
Search
  • Trending
  • World
  • Politics
  • Opinion
  • Business
    • Economy
    • Real Estate
    • Money
    • Crypto & NFTs
  • Tech
  • Lifestyle
    • Lifestyle
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Fashion / Beauty
    • Art & Books
    • Culture
  • Health
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
© 2024 America Age. All Rights Reserved.
America Age > Blog > Politics > Supreme Court Bans Recovery for Emotional Harm in Discrimination Suits
Politics

Supreme Court Bans Recovery for Emotional Harm in Discrimination Suits

Enspirers | Editorial Board
Share
Supreme Court Bans Recovery for Emotional Harm in Discrimination Suits
SHARE

WASHINGTON — Dividing 6 to 3 along ideological lines, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that victims of discrimination that is forbidden by four federal statutes may not sue if the only harm was emotional distress.

The case concerned Jane Cummings, a Texas woman who is deaf and communicates primarily in American Sign Language. In 2016, she sought treatment for chronic back pain at Premier Rehab Keller, a physical therapy facility in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, asking it to provide a sign language interpreter at her appointments.

The facility refused, saying Ms. Cummings could communicate with her therapist using notes, lip reading or gestures. She sued under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Affordable Care Act, both of which ban facilities receiving federal funds — as Premier Rehab Keller had — from discriminating on the basis of disability.

A federal judge found that the only injuries Ms. Cummings had suffered were “humiliation, frustration and emotional distress” and ruled that the laws she invoked did not allow suits for such emotional harm. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans, affirmed that ruling.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority on Thursday, said the laws at issue are something like contracts: In exchange for federal money, businesses agree not to discriminate and to be held accountable if they do. This was also true, he wrote, of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race or national origin, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which bars discrimination based on sex.

People suing for breach of contract, Chief Justice Roberts continued, generally cannot recover damages for emotional harm caused by the breach. By analogy, he wrote, people suing businesses that accept federal money cannot win such damages, either.

“After all,” the chief justice wrote, “when considering whether to accept federal funds, a prospective recipient would surely wonder not only what rules it must follow, but also what sort of penalties might be on the table.”

The Supreme Court used similar reasoning in 2002 in Barnes v. Gorman, ruling that such federal laws did not allow suits for punitive damages because those kinds of damages were not typically available in lawsuits for breach of contract.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett joined the majority opinion.

In dissent, Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote that the chief justice had asked the right question but given the wrong answer. Some sorts of contracts, he wrote, can give rise to suits for emotional harm.

“Does breach of a promise not to discriminate fall into this category?” he wrote. “I should think so.”

“The statutes before us seek to eradicate invidious discrimination,” he wrote. “That purpose is clearly nonpecuniary. And discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability is particularly likely to cause serious emotional harm.”

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined Justice Breyer’s dissent in the case, Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, No. 20-219.

Quoting an earlier opinion, Justice Breyer added that the majority had lost sight of the larger purpose of the anti-discrimination laws, which was “to vindicate ‘human dignity and not mere economics.’”

“But the court’s decision today allows victims of discrimination to recover damages only if they can prove that they have suffered economic harm, even though the primary harm inflicted by discrimination is rarely economic,” Justice Breyer wrote. “Indeed, victims of intentional discrimination may sometimes suffer profound emotional injury without any attendant pecuniary harms. The court’s decision today will leave those victims with no remedy at all.”

TAGGED:Appeals Courts (US)Compensation for Damages (Law)Decisions and VerdictsDiscriminationSupreme Court (US)TexasThe Washington MailUnited States Politics and Government
Share This Article
Twitter Email Copy Link Print
Previous Article Russia blocking evacuations from Ukrainian steel plant, official says Russia blocking evacuations from Ukrainian steel plant, official says
Next Article Why Ukraine’s Holocaust survivors are taking shelter in Israel Why Ukraine’s Holocaust survivors are taking shelter in Israel

Your Trusted Source for Accurate and Timely Updates!

Our commitment to accuracy, impartiality, and delivering breaking news as it happens has earned us the trust of a vast audience. Stay ahead with real-time updates on the latest events, trends.
FacebookLike
TwitterFollow
InstagramFollow
LinkedInFollow
MediumFollow
QuoraFollow
- Advertisement -
Ad image

Popular Posts

Naomi Judd autopsy confirms cause of death, as family says she was ‘dogged by an unfair foe’

Naomi Judd, pictured in 2013, died April 30. (Photo: Stephen Cohen/Getty Images)Naomi Judd's cause of…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

Russia’s Navalny says he faces new criminal charges

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia's opposition leader Alexei Navalny said Tuesday that he is facing new…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

Millions of Bees Bound for Alaska Are Rerouted and Die in Atlanta

When Sarah McElrea arrived at the Anchorage airport last Friday to pick up the 800…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

The Mystery Behind the Crime Wave at 312 Riverside Drive

He was sent home in late May. But his troubles followed — namely, smoking crack…

By Enspirers | Editorial Board

You Might Also Like

Appeals Court docket Restores Trump’s Management of California Nationwide Guard
Politics

Appeals Court docket Restores Trump’s Management of California Nationwide Guard

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
Names of Army Bases Altering Again to Unique, Trump Tells Military Crowd
Politics

Names of Army Bases Altering Again to Unique, Trump Tells Military Crowd

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla Interrupts Noem’s Press Convention, Forcibly Eliminated
Politics

Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla Interrupts Noem’s Press Convention, Forcibly Eliminated

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
Trump Indicators Resolutions Nixing California’s EV Guidelines
Politics

Trump Indicators Resolutions Nixing California’s EV Guidelines

By Enspirers | Editorial Board
America Age
Facebook Twitter Youtube

About US


America Age: Your instant connection to breaking stories and live updates. Stay informed with our real-time coverage across politics, tech, entertainment, and more. Your reliable source for 24/7 news.

Company
  • About Us
  • Newsroom Policies & Standards
  • Diversity & Inclusion
  • Careers
  • Media & Community Relations
  • WP Creative Group
  • Accessibility Statement
Contact Us
  • Contact Us
  • Contact Customer Care
  • Advertise
  • Licensing & Syndication
  • Request a Correction
  • Contact the Newsroom
  • Send a News Tip
  • Report a Vulnerability
Terms of Use
  • Digital Products Terms of Sale
  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Settings
  • Submissions & Discussion Policy
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Ad Choices
© 2024 America Age. All Rights Reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?