What ruling established the "mixed motives" standard in employment discrimination cases?

The "mixed motives" standard in employment discrimination cases was established in the case of Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. This ruling is significant because it addressed situations where both legitimate and discriminatory reasons contribute to an adverse employment decision. Specifically, the Supreme Court held that if an employee can demonstrate that discrimination was one of the factors in an employer's decision-making process, even if it was not the sole motive, the employer may still be held liable for discrimination.

This standard allows for a nuanced understanding of discrimination, recognizing that employment decisions can be influenced by a combination of legitimate reasons and discriminatory motives. As a result, this case broadened the scope of what could be considered discriminatory practices in the workplace and provided more avenues for employees to challenge unfair treatment. It set a precedent that remains pivotal in the interpretation of employment discrimination laws today.

In contrast, the other cases listed have their own notable contributions to employment law but do not establish the mixed motives standard. For instance, McDonnell Douglas v. Green developed the framework for evaluating claims of discrimination based on the burden-shifting analysis, while Griggs v. Duke Power Co. established the principle of disparate impact. Faragher v. City of Boca Raton addressed employer liability for sexual harassment. Each of these