In Meacham, the Supreme Court made it more difficult for employers to defend themselves against age discrimination suits. The Court held that employers—not plaintiffs—bear the burden of persuading a court that discriminatory employment decisions were based on “reasonable factors other than age.” 

The plaintiffs in the case were all laid off in 1996 from Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, a joint project between the Navy and the Department of Energy responsible for nuclear-powered warships. As work tailed off at the end of the Cold War, the Laboratory laid off 31 salaried workers—nearly all of whom were over 40.  These workers sued, alleging both disparate impact and disparate treatment claims under the ADEA. Under that Act, an employer does not discriminate if its employment decisions are based on “reasonable factors other than age.” The issue in the case was who should bear the burden of proof under this exception.

In a 7-1 decision written by Justice Souter, the Court held that this exception was an affirmative defense that must be proven by the employer. The Court emphasized that employees alleging discrimination must first overcome a non-trivial burden in “isolating and identifying the specific employment practices” that allegedly discriminate against older employees. But Congress placed the burden on employers to prove that their decisions were ultimately motivated by reasonable factors other than age. The Court acknowledged that “putting employers to the work of persuading factfinders that their choices are reasonable makes it harder and costlier to defend” and that “this will sometimes affect the way employers do business with their employees.” But “at the end of the day, [employers’] concerns have to be directed at Congress, which set the balance where it is.”