Supreme Court says “Mixed Motive” not enough for age discrimination

In a 5-4 decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the idea of a “mixed motive” age discrimination case under the ADEA. Plaintiffs must now prove that age was the “but-for” cause of the discriminatory action.

Here’s what they said:

"We hold that a plaintiff bringing a disparate-treatment claim pursuant to the ADEA must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that age was the “but-for” cause of the challenged adverse employment action. The burden of persuasion does not shift to the employer to show that it would have taken the action regardless of age, even when a plaintiff has produced some evidence that age was one motivating factor in that decision."

What does this mean? Before, plaintiffs could bring a claim if age was a factor in a decision. Now, they have to prove it was the factor.

Read the court’s full decision here.