Abstract
Federal courts across the country are wrestling with the question of whether the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (the "CRA" or the "Act") should apply to discriminatory conduct that took place prior to the Act's passage. The CRA brings significant change to the nation's employment discrimination laws; thus, much is at stake in the battle over the new laws application. Federal courts thus far have widely disagreed on whether to apply the CRA's provisions retroactively. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has agreed to address the issue. Hopefully, in resolving the issue of the CRA's retroactivity, the Supreme Court will resolve a broader problem, of which the confusion surrounding the CRA is but a single example. Since 1969, the Court has developed a schizophrenic body of law governing whether a law should be applied retroactively when Congress is silent on the matter. One line of precedent directs courts to presume that such laws apply prospectively; the other establishes a presumption in favor of applying the law in effect at the time of a court's decision. Not surprisingly, these conflicting signals have led to scattered results in cases dealing with whether the courts should retroactively apply statutes such as the CRA. The blame for this confusion, however, does not lie entirely with the Supreme Court.
Recommended Citation
Neff, Brian
(1993)
"Retroactivity and the Civil Rights Act
of 1991: An Opportunity for Reform,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1993:
No.
2, Article 4.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1993/iss2/4