{"title":"解开第七章的转介和延期计划所编织的网络","authors":"L. D. Taylor","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1243694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Title VII's dual enforcement scheme creates knotty preclusion and subject-matter jurisdiction issues. The statute requires that claims of employment discrimination made in those states or localities with their own administrative enforcement bodies must first be presented locally, and may be pursued in the federal system only after affording the state administrative body time to attempt their resolution. The result of this dual enforcement scheme is that in some cases, a claim comes to federal court after it has already been adjudicated in the state system. Questions then arise as to whether the federal court has jurisdiction to hear the claim and, if so, the extent to which the prior state determination deserves preclusive effect. This Article will attempt to untangle the complicated web of preclusion and jurisdiction issues created by Title VII's dual enforcement scheme, and to define for the benefit of students, practitioners, and judges the approach to resolving such issues that best furthers the implicated legal and policy concerns of workplace equality and federalism.","PeriodicalId":44667,"journal":{"name":"Catholic University Law Review","volume":"59 1","pages":"427-482"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2009-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Untangling the Web Spun by Title VII's Referral & Deferral Scheme\",\"authors\":\"L. D. Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1243694\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Title VII's dual enforcement scheme creates knotty preclusion and subject-matter jurisdiction issues. The statute requires that claims of employment discrimination made in those states or localities with their own administrative enforcement bodies must first be presented locally, and may be pursued in the federal system only after affording the state administrative body time to attempt their resolution. The result of this dual enforcement scheme is that in some cases, a claim comes to federal court after it has already been adjudicated in the state system. Questions then arise as to whether the federal court has jurisdiction to hear the claim and, if so, the extent to which the prior state determination deserves preclusive effect. This Article will attempt to untangle the complicated web of preclusion and jurisdiction issues created by Title VII's dual enforcement scheme, and to define for the benefit of students, practitioners, and judges the approach to resolving such issues that best furthers the implicated legal and policy concerns of workplace equality and federalism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Catholic University Law Review\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"427-482\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Catholic University Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1243694\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catholic University Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1243694","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Untangling the Web Spun by Title VII's Referral & Deferral Scheme
Title VII's dual enforcement scheme creates knotty preclusion and subject-matter jurisdiction issues. The statute requires that claims of employment discrimination made in those states or localities with their own administrative enforcement bodies must first be presented locally, and may be pursued in the federal system only after affording the state administrative body time to attempt their resolution. The result of this dual enforcement scheme is that in some cases, a claim comes to federal court after it has already been adjudicated in the state system. Questions then arise as to whether the federal court has jurisdiction to hear the claim and, if so, the extent to which the prior state determination deserves preclusive effect. This Article will attempt to untangle the complicated web of preclusion and jurisdiction issues created by Title VII's dual enforcement scheme, and to define for the benefit of students, practitioners, and judges the approach to resolving such issues that best furthers the implicated legal and policy concerns of workplace equality and federalism.