1、1 125 S. Ct. 1536 (2005).2 29 U.S.C. 621 et seq.Congressional Research Service The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS WebOrder Code RS22170June 20, 2005The Age Discrimination in Employment Actand Disparate Impact Claims: An Analysis ofthe Supreme Courts Ruling in Smit
2、h v. City ofJacksonname redacted and name redactedLegislative AttorneysAmerican Law DivisionSummaryThis report discusses Smith v. City of Jackson, a recent case in which the SupremeCourt held that workers may sue employers under the Age Discrimination inEmployment Act (ADEA) for workplace policies t
3、hat have an adverse impact on olderemployees, even if the discriminatory effects are not intentional. In March 2005, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Smith v. City of Jackson,1a case that involved questions about the scope of protection that older workers are entitledto under the Age Discrim
4、ination in Employment Act (ADEA).2 In a 5-3 ruling, the Courtheld that the ADEA authorizes disparate impact claims, which means that older workersmay sue employers for policies that have a discriminatory effect, even if the employer didnot intend to discriminate. This report provides a description o
