In a notable development, a straight white woman has managed to obtain green light from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to sue well-known law firm, King & Spalding. She alleges discrimination, as she was dissuaded from applying for a summer associate program that she says, was specifically aimed at “diverse” applicants. The complaint comes after similar lawsuits led to changes in diversity scholarship terms and conditions by other major law firms. Gibson Dunn and Morrison Foerster were among the firms that made adjustments to avoid lawsuits under Section 1981 of the 1866 Civil Rights Act.
The plaintiff, Sarah Spitalnick, contends that she missed out on the summer associate program, which paid $4,135 per week, solely because she is “a white, heterosexual adult female.” She hopes her lawsuit will send a clear message that discrimination of any kind is unacceptable.
Interestingly, the EEOC has found reasonable cause to believe that King & Spalding has indeed violated the law. This is significant because only about 2% of complaints receive such recognition. This could potentially encourage others to bring forward discrimination lawsuits against firms that they believe have rejected them or deterred them with their focus on diversity. Law360 provides a thorough coverage of the subject.
The full lawsuit and its implications are yet to unfold, but this is an unexpected turn of events that will undoubtedly incite a variety of responses within the legal sector. Regardless of the final verdict, these developments point to the complexities of implementing diversity initiatives in a fair and inclusive manner.
For more detailed coverage about the lawsuit, visit the original piece published at Above the Law.