•  
  •  
 

Hofstra Law Review

Article Title

Geduldig v. Aiello

Authors

John D. Nagy

Abstract

The ramifications of the Court's reasoning in Geduldig v. Aiello are clear upon an equally cursory analysis. Taken literally, the decision means that classification or discrimination based on pregnancy is not sex discrimination. Since such discrimination is not sex discrimination, an aggrieved woman cannot even raise a Title VII claim since the applicable statute deals with "sex" discrimination, not "pregnancy" discrimination. One court has already so held. But it is questionable whether the Aiello decision must be taken so literally as to deny Title VII relief to women discriminated against because they are pregnant. This note will examine Aiello's assumption that special treatment of pregnant women is not sex-based discrimination, and in particular, will consider whether such assumption should be considered a definitive holding for purposes of Title VII litigation.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

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.