Talk:Young v. United Parcel Service

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Court's holding[edit]

It is not clear to me what the 6-3 decision means for the woman in question. It says what she must show, not if her lawyers did show UPS was at fault. The 'conclusion' is unclear.--Lucas559 (talk) 17:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lucas -- The ultimate outcome was that the Court remanded the case to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to determine whether the employer engaged in discrimination under the new test enumerated in Justice Breyer's majority opinion. You are correct that this wasn't clear in the article, so I added a few sentences to clarify the outcome. The important legal development in this case is the new balancing test, but it is also important to let readers know what happened to the parties in the case :-) -- Notecardforfree (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]