Skip to contentNational Women's Law Center

Valarie Hogan, Fellow

Valarie Hogan is the Margaret Fund Fellow at the National Women's Law Center, where she focuses on issues related to education and employment. During law school, Valarie worked on various issues related to education, including special education and school discipline, as an intern at the EdLaw Project in Boston, the Education Law Center in Philadelphia, the U.S. Department of Justice Educational Opportunities Section in Washington, D.C., and Justice for Children and Youth in Toronto. Most recently, Valarie was an associate at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C. in Washington, D.C. Valarie is a graduate of the University of Georgia and Harvard Law School.

My Take

Dukes v. Wal-Mart Sticks Its Foot Back in the Courthouse Door

Posted by Valarie Hogan, Fellow | Posted on: September 25, 2012 at 02:39 pm

In what some may see as a modern version of “David and Goliath,” the women of Wal-Mart have fought for over a decade to challenge the discriminatory pay and promotion practices of the mega-retailer, which is located in all 50 states and Puerto Rico and is the largest private employer in the U.S. Last year, adding insult to alleged injury, the Supreme Court denied class certification in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) – finding that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the “commonality” requirement for class actions when they failed to provide proof that “[Wal-Mart] operate[d] under a general policy of discrimination.” The decision dealt a strong blow to those who would seek to become modern-day “Davids” – leading NWLC’s Co-President, Marcia Greenberger, to issue the following statement:

"Today’s ruling undermines the very purposes of the class action mechanism and is tantamount to closing the courthouse door on millions of women who cannot vindicate their rights one person at a time. The women of Wal-Mart — and women everywhere — will now face a far steeper road to challenge and correct pay and other forms of discrimination in the workplace."

The plaintiffs subsequently limited the size of their class by region – new class actions were filed in California and Texas, and complaints were filed with the EEOC in 48 states – and cut out women who held certain positions in response to the Supreme Court decision.

Read more...