Vance v. Ball State University

Vance v. Ball State University
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 26, 2012 Decided June 24, 2013
Full case name	Vance v. Ball State University
Docket no.	11-556
Citations	570 U.S. 421 (more) 133 S. Ct. 2434; 186 L. Ed. 2d 565; 2013 U.S. LEXIS 4703; 81 U.S.L.W. 4553
Case history
Prior	United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Holding
An employee is a "supervisor" for purposes of vicarious liability under Title VII only if he or she is empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the victim.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority	Alito, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas
Concurrence	Thomas
Dissent	Ginsburg, joined by Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
Laws applied
Title VII

Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. 421 (2013), is a U.S. Supreme Court case regarding who is a "supervisor" for the purposes of harassment lawsuits. The Supreme Court upheld the Seventh Circuit's decision in a 5–4 opinion written by Samuel Alito, rejecting the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretation of who counts as a supervisor.^[1] The case was important because it resolved a dispute between several different circuits.^[2][3][4]

The issue presented before the Court was:

Whether, as the Second, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits have held, the Faragher and Ellerth "supervisor" liability rule (i) applies to harassment by those whom the employer vests with authority to direct and oversee their victim's daily work, or, as the First, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits have held (ii) is limited to those harassers who have the power to "hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline" their victim.

— Questions presented, Vance v. Ball State University^[3]