Gender biases and discrimination has been the foremost concern in the United Statesin recent times. Such a volatile issue again became a forefront of collision when three ofthe sitting judges in the High Court went into a confrontation with their opposite sexes ina pending discrimination judgment against Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
The discrimination case which runs high against the world’s largest retail giant claims tohave upheld the petition filed against its local mangers being biased regarding femalestaffing promotions and salaries.
Justices such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg including Sonia Sotomayor as well as ElenaKagan challenged the case feature by voicing their legal support in the first ever genderlinked case filed with three of the female justices in the bench.
Wal-Mart’s appointed attorney, Theodore Boutrous was highly questioned by the threesitting justices on corporate decision makeovers and incoherent theories forming thebackground for such worker issues. Kagan further weighed her support with subjectivitybeing the primary issue for such staffing solutions. The three justices further questionedabout the authenticity of the gender policy followed by the retail giant and quoted similarcases being successfully concluded against American Telephone and Telegraph Co.
There are however higher chances for the case being concluded in familiar lines leavingthe challengers in total dissent. However it is interesting to note how the female justiceslaid down the subjectivity and deliberate modes of indifference followed by the retailgiant.
Justice Stephen Breyer however overruns being the only male counterpart who led hissupport for the females.