Smith v. Metropolitan District Commission, 105 F. Supp. 3d 185

Deborah Smith worked at the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) from 1979 until her position was eliminated in an October 7, 2011 reduction-in-force; she alleges Defendant John Zinzarella principally selected her for elimination.
Prior disputes: Smith sought a reclassification and alleged race discrimination in 2008; after a CHRO complaint she received a modest raise but not the requested reclassification.
In 2011 Smith submitted written comments criticizing the MDC’s Affirmative Action Plan; shortly thereafter her position was eliminated.
Smith sued the MDC and Zinzarella asserting, inter alia, violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Counts One and Two) and other claims; Defendants moved to dismiss the § 1981 counts.
The narrow legal question presented: whether § 1981, as amended in 1991, provides an implied private cause of action against local governmental entities (i.e., whether Jett was overruled by § 1981(c)).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 1981(c) creates a private cause of action against state/local governments (overruling Jett)	§ 1981(c) "protects against impairment by nongovernmental discrimination and impairment under color of State law," so Congress intended parallel remedies against private and state actors (relying on Ninth Circuit/Federation)	Jett remains controlling: § 1983 is the exclusive federal remedy for § 1981 violations by state actors; § 1981(c) creates substantive rights but not an independent remedy against governments	Court held Jett remains good law; § 1981(c) does not create an implied private right of action against governmental entities and dismissed Counts One and Two

Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 491 U.S. 701 (1989) (§ 1983 is the exclusive federal remedy for § 1981 violations by state governmental units)
Monell v. New York City Dep’t of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability under § 1983 requires an official policy or custom)
Runyon v. McCrary, 427 U.S. 160 (1976) (private actors may be liable under § 1981)
Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1989) (prior holding limiting § 1981’s reach to pre-contract conduct, later superseded by 1991 Amendments)
CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, 553 U.S. 442 (2008) (discussing Congress’s intent in the 1991 Amendments to supersede Patterson)
Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001) (courts may not infer private rights of action absent clear congressional intent)
Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66 (1975) (four-factor test historically used to infer implied private rights of action)