Should Prudential Standing Requirements Be Applied in Transferred Impact Sexual Harassment Cases

Abstract

The purpose of this Article is to propose a solution to the confusion created by an array of judicial reasoning over the issue of standing to pursue transferred impact discriminatory-environment sexual harassment cases. This is a solution reserved by decisions in other circuits, the provisions of Title VII itself and the real state of congressional intent when Title VII became law. A discussion of how such claims, if they become widespread, may place a strain on judicial resources will also be noted. We focus primarily on the issue of standing to pursue workplace sexual hostile environment claims when the actions undergirding the claims are directed at individuals of the opposite sex. Claims of alleged racial discrimination must also be reviewed in some detail; they are the geneses of Childress I. Two cases, Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. and Hackett v. McGuire Brothers, Inc. are of capital importance.