Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

§ 46a-58

Citation
§ 46a-58
Parent Document
Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2022-04-26

Other Sections in This Document (128)

Full Text

2,940 chars
authority under federal law. First, the branch contends
          that 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (f), the federal statute that
          allows for the bringing of a judicial action to enforce
          Title VII, authorizes only courts to find a Title VII viola-
          tion and to award damages for such violations. Second,
          the branch notes that the EEOC itself lacks such author-
          ity and contends that Congress would not have con-
          ferred authority on state administrative agencies that
          it opted not to confer on the federal agency charged
          with enforcing Title VII. Third, the branch argues that
          allowing the commission to award damages for Title
          VII violations would upset a carefully calibrated federal
          scheme and deny respondents such as the branch
          important procedural protections, such as the rights to
          a jury trial and to remove actions to federal court. We
          consider each argument in turn.
             The branch’s statutory argument relies on 42 U.S.C.
          § 2000e-5 (f),12 which provides in relevant part that the
          EEOC ‘‘may bring a civil action’’ alleging a Title VII
          violation and that ‘‘[e]ach United States district court
          . . . shall have jurisdiction of actions brought under
             12
                Section 2000e-5 (f), title 42, of the 2018 edition of the United States
          Code provides in relevant part: ‘‘(1) If within thirty days after a charge
          is filed with the [Equal Employment Opportunity] Commission . . . the
          Commission has been unable to secure from the respondent a conciliation
          agreement acceptable to the Commission, the Commission may bring a civil
          action against any respondent not a government, governmental agency, or
          political subdivision named in the charge. In the case of a respondent which
          is a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision, if the Com-
          mission has been unable to secure from the respondent a conciliation agree-
          ment acceptable to the Commission, the Commission shall take no further
          action and shall refer the case to the Attorney General who may bring a
          civil action against such respondent in the appropriate United States district
          court. . . . Upon request, the court may, in its discretion, stay further pro-
          ceedings for not more than sixty days pending the termination of State or
          local proceedings . . . .
                                                ***
             ‘‘(3) Each United States district court and each United States court of a
          place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States shall have jurisdiction
          of actions brought under this subchapter. . . .’’
April 26, 2022             CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                      Page 47