Explain whether or not you agree with the court's decision on the case below.

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not prohibit all discrimination against an employee on the basis of the employee's age.

Facts

Separate groups of individuals (plaintiffs) employed by Alabama or Florida state government agencies (defendants) filed lawsuits in three federal district courts. One such individual was J. Daniel Kimel, Jr. (co-plaintiff), an employee of the Florida Board of Regents (co-defendant). The employees alleged violations of the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), which broadly prohibited employers from discriminating against employees solely on the basis of age. The agencies argued that they were immune to the lawsuits because the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution protects a state's sovereign immunity against lawsuits filed by individual citizens in federal courts. One court agreed with the agencies and dismissed the lawsuit. Two courts disagreed with the agencies and denied the agencies' motions to dismiss. The losing parties in each case appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which consolidated the appeals and ruled that the ADEA did not abrogate (override) the agencies' Eleventh Amendment immunity. Because this decision conflicted with the decisions reached by other circuit courts of appeal, the United States Supreme Court granted the employees' petition for certiorari.

Issue

Does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibit all discrimination against an employee on the basis of the employee's age?

Holding and Reasoning (O'Connor, J.)

No. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not prohibit all discrimination against an employee on the basis of the employee's age. Age-based discrimination is permissible if it has a rational basis. Historically, employers have singled out employees for unfair discriminatory treatment based only on their race or sex, categories which distinguish population subsets from the general population and which bear little rational relation to employees' occupational qualifications. The aging process affects everyone and is rationally correlated to a decline in an employee's job-related abilities. Therefore, age is not a protected category. An employer may treat all employees in a particular age category differently from employees in younger or older categories without violating the Equal Protection Clause, even though the effects of aging on individual employees may vary. In this case, the ADEA contained provisions in which Congress clearly abrogated the Eleventh Amendment and gave individuals the right to sue state agencies for ADEA violations. This was an exercise of Congress's enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, this exercise of Section 5 power was valid only if ADEA violations threatened an individual's rights under the Equal Protection Clause. Because age, unlike race or sex, is not a category protected by the Equal Protection Clause, Congress had no valid Section 5 power to abrogate the Eleventh Amendment. The courts of appeal's ruling is affirmed.

Dissent (Thomas, J.)

The case can be decided by looking at the ADEA, without deciding the equal protection issue. Contrary to the majority's assertion, the ADEA did not clearly abrogate the Eleventh Amendment. The ADEA's enforcement provisions lack unmistakable clarity and, given the ADEA's legislative history, it cannot be inferred that Congress intended abrogation.

Dissent (Stevens, J.)

The Eleventh Amendment respects the rights of states in a federal system, but the Constitution protects federalism concerns in several ways, including the way in which states are represented in Congress. State representation in Congress ensured that when Congress enacted the ADEA and chose to abrogate the Eleventh Amendment, Congress did so knowingly and with due respect to federalism concerns. Exaggerated attention to the Eleventh Amendment should not be allowed to frustrate the ADEA enforcement measures chosen by Congress.ion.