In the case of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Commercial Office Products Co., 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The issue at hand was whether an employer could be held liable for refusing to hire an applicant because they had previously filed a charge against another employer under Title VII. The court concluded that such conduct by an employer is indeed unlawful and constitutes retaliation in violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII, which prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants or employees who have made charges, testified or participated in any manner in investigations, proceedings or hearings under this title. The decision clarified that protection from retaliation extends not only to individuals currently employed but also those seeking employment who have engaged in protected activity with previous employers.

In the dissenting opinion for EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. COMMERCIAL OFFICE PRODUCTS CO., Justice Scalia argued that the majority's decision to allow a plaintiff to sue under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act even after voluntarily settling their claim with their employer undermines the purpose and effectiveness of settlement agreements. He contended that this ruling discourages employers from entering into settlements, as they would not provide finality or protection against future litigation. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuse by plaintiffs who could use this loophole to extract more concessions from employers after already agreeing on a settlement. In his view, once an agreement is reached between parties in good faith and without coercion or fraud, it should be binding and preclude further claims related to the same incident.