In the Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins case of 1988, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a company could be held liable for sex discrimination if it allowed stereotyping to affect employment decisions. The plaintiff, Ann Hopkins, was denied partnership at Price Waterhouse accounting firm due to her perceived lack of femininity and aggressiveness which did not conform with gender stereotypes. She sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act claiming sex discrimination. The court found in favor of Hopkins stating that if an employer considers both legitimate and illegitimate factors in making an employment decision, they must prove by clear evidence that they would have made the same decision without considering the illegitimate factor (in this case - gender stereotype). This ruling established important precedent regarding workplace discrimination based on gender stereotypes.

In the dissenting opinion for Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, Justice White argued that the majority's decision to shift the burden of proof from plaintiff to defendant when discrimination was a motivating factor in an employment decision was not supported by Title VII of Civil Rights Act. He contended that this interpretation would lead employers to make decisions based on race or gender out of fear they could not prove non-discrimination if challenged. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority’s view that mixed-motive cases should be treated differently than single-motive ones and believed it complicated matters unnecessarily. Instead, he proposed maintaining consistency in applying standard rules for all types of discrimination claims under Title VII: once a plaintiff shows discriminatory treatment played some role in an adverse employment action, then employer must disprove its actions were discriminatory beyond reasonable doubt.