In Price Waterhouse V

question 62

Multiple Choice

In Price Waterhouse v.Hopkins, the Supreme Court held that:

• A) ​a plaintiff need to demonstrate and prove that the defendant used multiple prohibited factors (race, color, gender, religion, or natural origin) as a motive for an employment action.
• B) ​the plaintiff's demonstration for a "mixed motive" situation can only be made by circumstantial evidence.
• C) ​if an employer has considered an illegal factor under Title VII (race, sex, color, religion, or national origin) in making an employment decision, the employer must demonstrate that it would have reached the same decision if it had not considered the illegal factor.
• D) ​the employer violates Title VII when an illegal factor is considered, even though there may have been other factors also motivating the decision or practice.

---

Definitions:

Insurance Payment

Money paid by an insurer to cover losses as specified in an insurance policy.

Agricultural Act of 2014

A comprehensive statute passed in the United States that aimed to provide a policy framework for agriculture and food, including provisions for crop insurance and subsidies.

Rent-Seeking Activity

Efforts to increase one's share of existing wealth without creating new wealth, often through manipulation of the social or political environment.

Farm Subsidies

Financial assistance provided by the government to farmers and agribusinesses to supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities, and influence the cost and supply of such goods.