Supreme Court Skeptical of ‘Me, Too’ Bias Evidence
During U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments in an age bias suit yesterday, several justices appeared to side with an employer who is seeking to exclude testimony by other workers alleging discrimination by different supervisors.
The New York Times reports that “several justices, perhaps a majority” agree that such “me, too” evidence should never be admitted or that there should be a strong presumption against it. Federal appeals courts are split on the issue, Law.com reports.
Several justices said admission of such evidence might require “minitrials” to test whether the evidence is valid. “We’ll have trials that last a thousand years,” Justice Stephen G. Breyer said. He wondered whether it was proper to let appeals court second-guess trial court evidence decisions.
The plaintiff, Ellen Mendelsohn, claims she was let go at age 51 in layoffs at Sprint/United Management Co. because of age discrimination.
U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement filed a brief mostly favorable to Mendelsohn, the ABA Journal reported its November story on employment cases this term. The brief argues the Federal Rules of Evidence establish a low threshold for admission of such evidence, but would allow for exclusion if it is likely to confuse and distract the jury.
The case is Sprint/United Management Company v. Mendelsohn.
