In a groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court has made it easier for workers who are involuntarily transferred from one job to another to pursue job discrimination claims under federal civil rights law. The ruling, delivered on Wednesday, establishes that workers only need to demonstrate that the transfer resulted in some level of harm, regardless of its significance, to prove their discrimination claims.

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the court, stated that the previous requirement of showing significant job disadvantage was no longer necessary. The unanimous ruling came as a result of a sex discrimination lawsuit filed by a St. Louis police sergeant, Sgt. Jaytonya Muldrow, who was forcibly transferred to a different position but retained her rank and pay. Muldrow had worked for nine years in the intelligence division before being reassigned to a supervisory role in the patrol unit.

The case revolved around Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a federal law prohibiting workplace discrimination based on sex, race, religion, and national origin. Lower courts had dismissed Muldrow's claim, arguing that she had not experienced a significant job disadvantage. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with this approach and revived her lawsuit.

Justice Kagan emphasized that under the new ruling, many similar cases are likely to have different outcomes. She cited examples of workers who had previously lost discrimination suits, such as an engineer assigned to a cramped wind tunnel, a shipping worker strictly assigned to night shifts, and a school principal forced into a non-school administrative role.

The Supreme Court's decision was unanimous, but Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas each expressed some disagreement with the majority's reasoning. Madeline Meth, Muldrow's lawyer, expressed her client's satisfaction with the outcome, noting that the ruling ensures employers cannot discriminate based on race and gender when determining job assignments.

As a result of the ruling, Muldrow's lawsuit will now resume in lower courts. She alleges that her transfer to a less prestigious, administrative role that often required weekend work, and the loss of her take-home city car, were direct consequences of sex discrimination. Justice Kagan highlighted that if these allegations are proven, Muldrow would have suffered multiple harms as a result of the forced transfer.

The Supreme Court's decision marks a significant victory for workers, as it establishes clearer protections against discrimination in cases where job transfers are imposed against their will. By expanding the scope of permissible claims, the ruling sends a strong message that employers are not allowed to make decisions about job assignments based on gender or race.