Babb v. Wilkie

Noris Babb, a clinical pharmacist at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, alleged that she was subjected to adverse personnel actions because of her age and sex. She sued under the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. The district court granted summary judgment for the VA, holding that Babb failed to show age was a “but-for” cause of the decisions. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a circuit split on the required standard of causation. In its decision issued on April 6, 2020, the Court ruled that under 29 U.S.C. § 633a(a), federal-sector plaintiffs need only prove that age was a motivating factor in the challenged personnel action, not a but-for cause. However, the Court also held that remedies are limited: if the employer demonstrates it would have taken the same action absent the discriminatory motive, the plaintiff cannot obtain damages, reinstatement, or promotion, and is limited to declaratory or injunctive relief. The case was vacated and remanded.

The Supreme Court held that the ADEA’s federal-sector provision requires a plaintiff to prove that age was a motivating factor in the employment decision, not a but-for cause. However, if the employer shows it would have made the same decision for other reasons, the available remedies are limited to declaratory or injunctive relief, barring damages or reinstatement. The Eleventh Circuit’s judgment was vacated, and the case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with this standard.

Whether the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 requires a plaintiff to prove that age was a but-for cause of the challenged personnel action, or merely a motivating factor in the decision.

The ruling established a more lenient standard of proof for federal employees pursuing age discrimination claims compared to private-sector employees, making it easier to establish liability. It clarified that while liability can be shown with a motivating-factor test, the remedy limitations prevent a full recovery if the employer had independent legitimate reasons. This decision significantly impacts federal employment litigation, strengthens protections for older federal workers, and influences how government agencies evaluate and defend personnel decisions involving age-related claims.