Frances E. Porcher, Etc. v. Mary E. Brown, Etc.

1983-01-17

Headline: Court declines to review dispute over pregnancy and unemployment benefits, leaving a lower-court order that South Carolina pay retroactive benefits in place and a federal-agency conflict unresolved.

Holding: The Court denied review of the Fourth Circuit’s decision, leaving in place the order that South Carolina pay retroactive unemployment benefits and leaving key legal questions unresolved.

Real World Impact:

Leaves lower-court order requiring South Carolina to pay retroactive benefits in place.
Creates uncertainty for state unemployment administrators about acceptable rules.
Affects many pregnant workers who rely on unemployment compensation.

Topics: pregnancy and unemployment benefits, state unemployment rules, federal agency versus courts, state immunity

Summary

Background

A group of women who were denied unemployment benefits after resigning because of pregnancy challenged South Carolina’s rules. The Fourth Circuit found the state’s rule conflicted with a federal law provision that says no one may be denied unemployment benefits solely because of pregnancy. The lower courts ordered the state agency to pay back benefits dating to January 1, 1978. The Department of Labor, however, has repeatedly certified South Carolina’s program as acceptable and interprets the law differently.

Reasoning

The key legal question is what the federal rule actually requires: must pregnancy be treated exactly like all other illnesses, or may a state deny benefits when pregnancy alone caused a person to quit? The dissenting opinion points out a direct conflict between the Fourth Circuit and the Department of Labor, which helps run and certify state programs and was involved in the law’s drafting. The dissent also identifies two other important questions: whether the unemployment fund can be sued given state immunity, and whether individuals can use a separate civil-rights law to enforce the federal unemployment rule.

Real world impact

Because the Supreme Court refused to review the case, the Fourth Circuit’s ruling stays in effect in that region. State administrators face uncertainty about how to write rules. South Carolina is said to be paying about $1.5 million more per year because of the decision. Large numbers of pregnant women who may depend on unemployment benefits remain affected.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White, joined by Justices Powell and Rehnquist, dissented from the denial and would have granted review to resolve the three important questions.