Summary: This article discusses a possible future application of the reasoning in Muldrow v. St. Louis, by comparing that case to past decisions that set up the “severe or pervasive” standard.
I previously wrote about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, in which the Court made it clear that discrimination is unlawful as long as it causes “some” harm. A plaintiff does not have to meet some arbitrary bar of “significant” harm just to bring their case. Any disadvantageous change in the “terms, conditions, or privileges of employment,” if done for an unlawfully discriminatory reason, violates Title VII. This article explores one area, hostile work environment claims, where Muldrow’s reasoning could also apply.