Johnson v. New York
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1DissentJacobs, Circuit Judge
I respectfully dissent. The majority frames the issue as “whether, by adopting the Air National Guard’s (the “Guard”) mandatory age-60 retirement policy as a term of employment,” the Division violated the ADEA. Having framed the issue in that way, the majority has little trouble concluding that the Division’s policy is facially discriminatory. I do not see the issue in terms of an adoption by reference of the Guard’s retirement policy. Nor do I think that the Division’s termination policy is “inextricably linked” to age. I would therefore consider the Division’s policy within the McDonnell…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Hazen Paper Co. v. BigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Gilligan v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity & Deferred Compensation Plans v. NorrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Ridgway v. AldrigeDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1989