Editor's Note :

close editor's note Editor's Note :

We’re hosting a symposium on the Roberts court and the First Amendment’s religion clauses. In a series of six essays, scholars and commentators will analyze major decisions from the 2019-20 term and look to the future of the court’s religion jurisprudence. Click to follow along.

Wal-Mart v. Dukes

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
10-277 9th Cir. Mar 29, 2011
Tr.Aud.
Jun 20, 2011 5-4 Scalia OT 2010

Holding: The certification of the nationwide class of female employees was not consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), which requires the party seeking class certification to prove that the class has common questions of law or fact; moreover, the plaintiffs' claims for backpay were improperly certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2), because claims for monetary relief cannot be certified under that provision when the monetary relief is not incidental to the requested injunctive or declaratory relief.

Judgment: Reversed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on June 20, 2011. Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined the opinion as to Parts I and III. Justice Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, which Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Briefs and Documents

Merits Briefs

Amicus Briefs

Certiorari-stage documents

 
Share:
Term Snapshot
At a Glance
Awards