← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

McDonnell-Douglas v. Green (employment discrim)

No. 72-490 SCOTUS · Decided Teaching/Historical SCOTUS
Decided: Apr 11, 1994
Court
U.S. Supreme Court
scotus
Decided
Apr 11, 1994
Filed (CL)
Jan 14, 1994
CL Status
terminated

Title VII Statutory interpretation (legislative intent and background knowledge)

Legal Issues

Title VIIStatutory interpretation (legislative intent and background knowledge)

BrynoDC Coverage 1 video


The Law · How the Case Works

Overview

Overview

Established the burden-shifting framework for employment discrimination claims under Title VII, requiring plaintiff to show prima facie case before employer must articulate legitimate, non-discriminatory reason.

The Facts

Facts

Percy Green, a Black mechanic, was rejected for rehire at McDonnell-Douglas after participating in illegal protest activities. Green filed suit claiming racial discrimination under Title VII. The district court found McDonnell-Douglas articulated legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for rejection, and the court of appeals affirmed, finding no evidence of pretext.

The Issue

Issue

What evidentiary burden-shifting framework governs a Title VII plaintiff's claim of racially discriminatory refusal to rehire, and whether a plaintiff's participation in illegal protest activity forfeits protection from discriminatory non-rehire.

The Rules

Rule

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), established the three-step burden-shifting framework for Title VII disparate treatment cases: (1) plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination by circumstantial evidence; (2) the burden shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason; (3) the plaintiff must demonstrate the stated reason is a pretext for discrimination. The framework has governed employment discrimination litigation for over fifty years.

The Application

Analysis

Under the McDonnell-Douglas framework, Green first had to establish a prima facie case by showing he was a qualified Black mechanic previously rejected for a position he previously held, creating circumstantial evidence of discrimination. McDonnell-Douglas then satisfied its burden by articulating a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason: Green's participation in illegal protest activities. Green failed to demonstrate this stated reason was pretextual, as the evidence supported that the company's concerns about his illegal conduct, rather than his race, motivated the refusal to rehire, and the courts found no sufficient evidence to rebut the employer's articulated justification.

The Conclusion

Conclusion

The Supreme Court held that Title VII plaintiffs must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination through circumstantial evidence, after which the burden shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the challenged action. If the employer does so, the plaintiff must then prove the stated reason is pretextual. This three-stage burden-shifting framework became the standard approach for disparate treatment cases and has been widely applied across employment discrimination law.

Court -
FiledJan 14, 1994
CL Statusterminated

No circuit court data for this case.

Cert Granted -
Statusterminated
Filed (CL)Jan 14, 1994
SCOTUS TMR-d74318c6 Jul 28, 2026
Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support