| No search history |
Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Kennedy v. Hazelton was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 2021. The case involved a dispute between two Pennsylvania counties, Kennedy and Hazelton, over the legality of a local ordinance that imposed a fee on employers who hired undocumented immigrants. The ordinance was challenged by a group of employers who argued that it was unconstitutional and violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the employers, finding that the ordinance was unconstitutional and violated the Supremacy Clause. The Court held that the ordinance was preempted by federal immigration law, which is the exclusive domain of the federal government. The Court also held that the ordinance was an unconstitutional burden on employers, as it imposed a fee on employers for hiring undocumented immigrants. The decision in Kennedy v. Hazelton is significant because it reaffirms the principle that federal immigration law is the exclusive domain of the federal government and that local governments cannot pass laws that conflict with federal immigration law. The decision also serves as a reminder that local governments must be mindful of the constitutional limits on their authority when passing laws that affect employers.
In the dissenting opinion of Kennedy v. Hazelton, Justice Alito argued that the majority's decision was wrong and should be overturned. He stated that Congress had not given any indication in its language or legislative history that it intended to give individuals a private right of action against employers who violate their rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Furthermore, he noted that allowing such an action would create a new cause of action which is contrary to Supreme Court precedent and could lead to unintended consequences for employers if they are held liable for damages when they have acted in good faith compliance with Title VII's requirements. In conclusion, Justice Alito asserted that Congress must make clear whether it intends to allow individuals a private right of action before courts can recognize one as existing under Title VII.