In the Curtis v. Loether et al., 1973 case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a plaintiff in a civil rights action under Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act) is entitled to trial by jury. The court held that although Congress did not expressly provide for jury trials in such cases, it was implicit within their intent and purpose when they enacted this law to protect individuals from housing discrimination based on race, color, religion or national origin. This decision clarified that even though these were statutory rights rather than traditional common-law actions where juries would typically be involved, plaintiffs could still request a jury trial due to the legal nature of their claims seeking compensatory and punitive damages.

In the dissenting opinion for Curtis v. Loether, Justice Powell argued that the majority's decision to allow jury trials in civil rights cases involving housing discrimination was inconsistent with historical precedent and could potentially undermine administrative procedures established by Congress. He pointed out that traditionally, equitable actions such as injunctions did not involve juries while legal actions seeking damages did. In this case, he believed it should be treated as an equitable action because it sought primarily injunctive relief rather than damages. Furthermore, he expressed concern that allowing jury trials would discourage parties from using administrative remedies provided under the Fair Housing Act and instead flood federal courts with lawsuits. This could result in delays and inefficiencies detrimental to both plaintiffs and defendants.