米国における雇用差別訴訟とマネジング・ダイバーシティ ―公共訴訟の視角から―米国における雇用差別訴訟とマネジング・ダイバーシティ ―公共訴訟の視角から―AA11162950 Employment Discrimination Litigation and Managing Diversity in the United States: From the Perspective of Public Law Litigation
This research explores judicial activism in employment discrimination suits from theperspective of public law litigation, and concludes as follows:First, employment discrimination litigation has had the characteristics of public lawlitigation. The legislative purpose of Title Ⅶ of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to eliminateemployment discrimination and realize equal employment opportunity, and the ambiguousdefinitions of principal concepts of Title Ⅶ by Congress have often led the court to judicialactivism, which often plays not only a judiciary role but also legislative and administrativeones.Second, focusing on systemic disparate treatment theory, voluntary affirmative action,and disparate impact theory, which have made significant impacts on elimination of employmentdiscrimination, the research verified judicial activism of the court. Judges have decided forprotecting people’s civil rights, ordered affirmative actions with goals and timetables, judgedaffirmative action being constitutional and not violating Title Ⅶ, and directly or indirectlymonitored for implementations of decrees or consent decrees. Judicial activism has stronglypromoted to abolish job segregation by race and gender that is the root of employmentdiscrimination, and supported EEOC and OFCCP and naturally collaborated with them to makelegislative purpose of Title Ⅶ come true.Third, judicial activism has been progressing since the 1990s, introducing, althoughimplementation is insufficient, managing diversity―pursuing diversity and inclusion in theworkplace beyond legal compliance―to consent decrees.