October Term 2000 · Docket 00-763
Does the 1991 Civil Rights Act cap front pay awards?
The dispute centers on whether front pay counts as compensatory damages under the 1991 Act.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Ms. Caldwell argued Congress never intended to cap front pay.
She cited Section 2 of the Act to support her view.
Mr. Roberts argued front pay is not subject to the cap.
Mr. Ripple described the division of responsibilities between judge and jury.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 21-6 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 21-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 21-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 21-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 10-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 10-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 16-17 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 16-17
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of the 1991 Civil Rights Act. The Act added caps on certain damages. The parties disagree on how to classify front pay.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 21-6 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 21-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 21-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 21-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 10-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 10-27
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 23, 2001.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-9
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to confirm front pay is not capped.
the opposing side wants the Court to apply the cap to front pay.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 21-6 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 21-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 21-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 21-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 10-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 10-27
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues Congress excluded front pay from the cap.
the opposing side argues front pay is a type of compensatory damages.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 21-6 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 21-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 21-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 21-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 10-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 10-27
What the justices asked
The Chief Justice asked about the division of responsibilities between judge and jury.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 16-17 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 16-17
Why it matters
This case defines the maximum financial liability for employers in discrimination suits. It clarifies the scope of statutory damages caps. It affects how courts calculate final awards for victims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 21-6 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 21-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 21-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 21-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 10-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 10-27
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 16-17 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 16-17
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 21-6 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 21-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 21-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 21-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 10-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 10-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 21-6 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 21-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 21-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 21-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 10-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 10-27
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.