Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

ORCID (Links to author’s additional scholarship at ORCID.org)



The Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc. outlined a new analytical framework for Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) claims that challenge employers’ failure to “accommodate” pregnant workers. That framework was intended to lessen the evidentiary burden on plaintiff-employees in showing that others “similar in their ability or inability to work” were accommodated and to increase the burden on defendant-employers in justifying such differential treatment. In the five years since Young, however, lower courts have been inconsistent in their application of this mandate. In this Article, we survey the precedent that set the stage for Young, the decision’s new approach to accommodation claims under the PDA, and the mixed precedent that has followed. We identify for practitioners the flawed reasoning in negative post- Young rulings and emphasize arguments that best fulfill the letter and spirit of Young’s expansive approach to the PDA.

Publication Title

Harvard Law & Policy Review

Document Type




To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.