Justices Uphold Retaliation Lawsuits

Among other claims, Humphries said his dismissal violated provisions of the Reconstruction-era Civil Rights Act of 1866.

In yesterday's opinion by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, the court agreed. Even though reprisals are not specifically addressed in the law, the idea that the act "encompasses retaliation claims is indeed well-embedded," Breyer wrote.

"That being so, considerations of stare decisis strongly support our adherence to that view," he added.

Thomas wrote that the court's opinion "has no basis in the text" of the statute and that retaliation is not the same thing as "discrimination based on race."

In the postal worker's case, Gomez-Perez said that after she filed an age-discrimination complaint against the Postal Service, she was subjected to various forms of retaliation, including false accusations of sexual harassment and drastically reduced work hours.

The ADEA prohibits retaliation against private-sector employees but does not specifically mention such a ban for federal workers.

But Alito wrote that the phrase "discrimination based on age" in the federal-sector provision "includes retaliation based on the filing of an age discrimination complaint."

Echoing Breyer in the other case, he wrote: "We are guided by our prior decisions interpreting similar language in other anti-discrimination statutes."

Roberts disagreed in that case. He said Congress protected federal workers through the civil service process and "did not intend those employees to have a separate judicial remedy for retaliation."