Abstract
This Comment argues that courts should read Crawford’s expanded definition of oppose to extend the protection of Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision to pure third-party victims of retaliation. Part II of this Comment presents a history of Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision. Part III discusses the holding of Crawford and its potential impact on pure third-party retaliation claims under Title VII. Part IV explains how reading Crawford to allow third-party retaliation claims furthers the policy goals of Title VII. Part V concludes that courts should read Crawford as extending Title VII’s anti-retaliation protections to victims of pure third-party retaliation.
Recommended Citation
Michael Costello, Crawford’s Expansive Definition of “Oppose” Breathes New Life into Pure Third-Party Retaliation Claims Under Title VII, 34 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 553 (2011).
