By The Editors

Dukes v Wal-Mart Stores, Inc, the eight-year-old gender-discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart, the largest civil rights class-action in history, will reach another critical point on March 24 when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals hears oral arguments on whether the current and former women employees suing the giant discount retailer can legally be called a class. The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) has submitted a friend of the court brief on behalf of the plaintiffs in the case.

Wal-Mart is challenging a December 2007 court decision which declared that the two million women claiming that discrimination in pay, promotions and job assignments were a class. The class-action suit arose from claims of six current and former employees who said that the store’s actions against them and other female employees violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Wal-Mart is also asserting that the plaintiffs in the case cannot seek monetary damages as part of their claim-a position the LDF brief declares is wrong. John Payton, LDF’s President and Director-Counsel, said that, through the Civil Rights Act of 1991, “Congress made clear its intent was to expand the scope of protections against any type of discrimination in the workplace by extending the types of damages available to victims of intentional discrimination. Wal-Mart is attempting to undermine those protections.”

Read the LDF brief (PDF).