EL v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
479 F.3d 232 (3d Cir. 2007)
Relevant factsFree
El (plaintiff) was terminated from his paratransit driving job under SEPTA's (defendant's) subcontract policy barring anyone with a violent criminal conviction, based on a second-degree murder conviction from a gang shooting when he was 15, despite serving his sentence and having no subsequent violent offenses in 40 years; SEPTA defended its policy as a business necessity through expert testimony on recidivism risks and the particular vulnerability of disabled paratransit passengers, and El never offered rebuttal expert testimony of his own.
IssueFree
Whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 strictly prohibits bright-line criminal conviction policies.
Related cases
Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc.501 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2007)Baylie v. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago476 F.3d 522 (7th Cir. 2007)Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Schneider National, Inc.481 F.3d 507 (7th Cir. 2007)In the Matter of Evanston Northwestern Healthcare CorporationDocket No. 9315 (F.T.C. August 2007)In re Northwest Airlines Corporation363 B.R. 701 (2007)