800 F.3d 928
7th Cir.2015Background
- Theresa Bisluk, a long‑time Illinois Liquor Control Commission Special Agent I who identifies as a Republican, sought a transfer from Chicago to southern Illinois after buying property there.
- A forthcoming Agent II vacancy (Fournie’s position) was processed by management; the Department required formal procedures: an official Request for Transfer (RPS‑65), a posted job application (CMS‑100) during the posting period, and passage of the Agent II exam to be on the eligibility list.
- Bisluk hand‑delivered a handwritten transfer letter to her supervisor in March 2007, but her initial RPS‑65 was incomplete (undated/unsigned/blank). She was told to apply via the posting and to submit the formal transfer request; she checked the CMS posting site but did not apply when the position was posted in October 2007.
- The Department administered an Agent II exam when no eligibility list existed; Bisluk did not take the exam and had no eligible score. The position was filled after interviews and acceptance processes; Becky McClure (a Democrat) was hired.
- Bisluk sued, alleging First Amendment political‑affiliation discrimination (Welch and Krozel) and Fourteenth Amendment sex discrimination (Welch). The district court granted summary judgment for defendants; the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Amendment: Were Bisluk’s political views a motivating factor in denial of transfer? | Bisluk: Welch knew her Republican ties and displayed animus; Krozel turned a blind eye to partisan hiring. | Defendants: Bisluk never followed required application/transfer procedures or took the exam, so she was not considered; no causal link to politics. | Held for defendants — plaintiff failed to show causal link because she did not submit the proper transfer request or apply/take exam. |
| Fourteenth Amendment (sex discrimination): Did Welch deny a transfer because of sex? | Bisluk: Welch was more critical of female agents and scrutinized her, supporting discrimination inference. | Defendants: No adverse employment action occurred; she never applied, and no male comparator who similarly failed to apply received the job. | Held for defendants — no actionable adverse action and no sufficient comparator or causal link. |
Key Cases Cited
- Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (Sup. Ct.) (political affiliation of public employees is protected against discriminatory discharge)
- Rutan v. Republican Party of Ill., 497 U.S. 62 (Sup. Ct.) (promotions, transfers, and hiring decisions cannot be based on political affiliation except for policymaking positions)
- Mt. Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (Sup. Ct.) (framework allocating burden on motivating‑factor causation)
- Spiegla v. Hull, 371 F.3d 928 (7th Cir.) (motivating factor analysis in public‑employee speech/political cases)
- Peele v. Burch, 722 F.3d 956 (7th Cir.) (burden‑shifting for motivating factor causation on summary judgment)
- Brown v. County of Cook, 661 F.3d 333 (7th Cir.) (nonpolitical grounds that would have caused the same action defeat political discrimination claims)
- Rudin v. Lincoln Land Cmty. Coll., 420 F.3d 712 (7th Cir.) (burdens for proving § 1983 equal‑protection employment discrimination)
- Bruno v. City of Crown Point, Ind., 950 F.2d 355 (7th Cir.) (direct and indirect methods of proof for discrimination claims)
- Harper v. Fulton Cty., Ill., 748 F.3d 761 (7th Cir.) (direct method requires inference that intent was discriminatory)
- Weber v. Univs. Research Ass’n, Inc., 621 F.3d 589 (7th Cir.) (elements of prima facie case under indirect method)
- Ajayi v. Aramark Bus. Servs., 336 F.3d 520 (7th Cir.) (criteria for determining whether employees are similarly situated)
- Herrnreiter v. Chicago Hous. Auth., 315 F.3d 742 (7th Cir.) (transfer without loss of pay/benefits and based on employee preference is not adverse action)
- Steinhauer v. DeGolier, 359 F.3d 481 (7th Cir.) (Title VII/§ 1983 analyses of employment actions are aligned)