October Term 2008 · Docket 07-543
Does a pension plan violate the law by crediting pregnancy leave differently than other medical leave?
AT&T argues its pension plan treats pregnancy leave fairly. Hulteen claims the plan discriminates against women.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — 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
Mr. Phillips argued the distinction between discrimination outside and inside the seniority system.
Ms. Blatt argued the Ninth Circuit decision imposes retroactive liability on AT&T.
Justice Breyer questioned the distinction between maintaining a salary structure and administering it unlawfully.
Justice Souter asked why the same analysis cannot apply to daily retirement benefits.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 37-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 37-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 13-25 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 13-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 15-51 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 15-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-45
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
AT&T seeks to keep its pension plan unchanged. Hulteen wants the court to strike down the plan. The dispute centers on how the plan credits time off for pregnancy versus other illnesses.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 15-51 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 15-51
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 10, 2008.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-7
What each side wants
AT&T wants the Supreme Court to uphold its pension plan structure.
Hulteen wants the Supreme Court to invalidate the pension plan.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 15-51 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 15-51
What each side says
AT&T argues the plan treats all medical leave equally under current law.
Hulteen argues the plan discriminates against women by crediting pregnancy leave differently.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 15-51 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 15-51
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked about the United States position in the Ninth Circuit.
Justice Ginsburg asked about the difference between immediate and future consequences in prior cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 37-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 37-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 13-25 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 13-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-45
Why it matters
This case defines how employers must credit pregnancy leave in pension plans. It affects the financial security of working mothers. It sets the standard for equal treatment in retirement benefits.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 15-51 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 15-51
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 10, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 23-41 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 23-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 37-47 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 37-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 13-25 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 13-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-45
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 16, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 15-51 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 15-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 15-51 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 15-51
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.