Seventh Circuit Reviews ADA Discrimination Standards
Employers may face a higher burden of proof requirement if the court adopts the Muldrow standard for disability-based claims.
Updated on Oct. 28, 2026 in Human Resources
Live Poll
Should federal law require employers to grant shift change requests from workers with disabilities?
The Seventh Circuit is evaluating whether the Supreme Court's 2024 Muldrow v. City of St. Louis decision extends to Americans with Disabilities Act claims. The court heard arguments regarding a case where a deaf Costco forklift worker alleged that the denial of a shift change request constituted discrimination.
Why it matters
Operators must monitor whether disability discrimination standards shift toward the higher threshold of demonstrating concrete harm required by the 2024 Supreme Court ruling. This legal determination could reset the bar for how businesses manage and document accommodation requests from employees.
The case weighs the 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis against protections established by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court is currently evaluating whether a plaintiff must prove specific harm for ADA claims, an issue that remains legally unresolved.
The players
Costco Wholesale Co.
A multinational warehouse club operator with a massive retail footprint and extensive workforce.
David Brody
A deaf forklift worker who alleged discrimination regarding a shift change request.
Seventh Circuit
A federal appellate court overseeing cases within its jurisdiction that sets legal precedents for employers.
United States Supreme Court
The nation's highest judicial body that established the Muldrow precedent for discrimination claims.
The details
The Seventh Circuit is weighing the threshold for workplace discrimination claims after a deaf forklift worker sued Costco for denying a requested shift change. While the Muldrow ruling established that Title VII plaintiffs must show tangible harm, this case seeks to determine if that same evidentiary burden applies to claims filed under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Operators face a potential shift in compliance requirements if the court decides that workplace accommodation disputes require similar proofs of objective harm.
Timeline
1964: Enactment of the Civil Rights Act.
2024: Supreme Court ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis.
October 28, 2026: Seventh Circuit judges heard arguments in the case.
Market Landscape
This litigation tests the limits of the 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis. It marks a significant moment in the evolution of employment law as courts decide how far to extend new evidentiary burdens for discrimination claims across different statutes.
Employers should review their documentation processes for all employee accommodation denials to ensure they are prepared for a potential shift in legal standards. Counsel should be consulted regarding how the Muldrow decision impacts your specific jurisdiction and internal HR policies.
The takeaway
The Seventh Circuit's decision could fundamentally alter the evidentiary standard for disability discrimination claims nationwide. Operators should work with legal counsel to assess how their internal handling of accommodation requests aligns with the evolving 2024 Supreme Court precedent.
Further reading
For more on managing compliance and accommodation requests, visit Human Resources.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Bloomberglaw.
Live Poll
Should federal law require employers to grant shift change requests from workers with disabilities?
