Since I didn't ask a specific question last week about civil rights - and since the Supreme Court ruled on what may turn out to be a major gender discrimination case - I want you to address a question regarding Coleman v. Maryland Court of Appeals.
I posted on this case below and we discussed it briefly in class since the court used the doctrine of state sovereign immunity to toss out a laws suit against a state (a concept we also covered in federalism). The law in question, the Family and Medical Leave Act was justified, when it was passed, as a way to deal with gender discrimination in family medical leave, but this case - if I understand it correctly - applied that logic to personal leave. The majority on the court did not accept the idea that gender discrimination existed in the administration of sick leave.
I want you to read through the three opinions issued in the case - the majority, concurrence, and dissent - and outline the disagreements between them. Once you do, comment on the nature of gender discrimination as a consequence of the decision.
