SCOTUS: No emotional distress damages under certain antidiscrimination statutes

The U.S. Supreme Court recently resolved a long-standing question many courts have wrestled with by holding that a person suing under the four Spending Clause statutes couldn’t recover damages for emotional distress.

Background

Congress has passed many laws that prohibit discrimination. Four such statutes were passed using Congress’ authority under the Spending Clause in the U.S. Constitution:

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which forbids race, color, and national origin discrimination in federally funded programs or activities;
• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which similarly prohibits sex-based discrimination;
• The Rehabilitation Act, which bars funding recipients from discriminating because of disability; and
• The Affordable Care Act (ACA), which outlaws discrimination on any of the preceding grounds, in addition to age, by healthcare entities receiving federal funds.

It’s not uncommon to see these statutes paired with allegations filed by employees under other nondiscrimination statutes, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Indeed, when an employer receives federal funds or is a government contractor (such as many healthcare facilities, schools, and financial institutions), the four statues above may be the sole basis, depending on the circumstances, for a lawsuit.

Emotional damages denied under Rehabilitation Act and ACA