Background
Joe Bravo, a teacher, was fired after students complained about racially insensitive remarks. He sued the Dallas Independent School District alleging discrimination based on his Mexican-American ancestry in violation of Title VII. The district court granted summary judgment, ruling that Bravo failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.
The court’s reasoning
The court explained that under the McDonnell Douglas framework, an employee must prove they were treated less favorably than similarly situated employees who were not members of the protected class. The district court granted summary judgment at the fourth prong because Bravo failed to offer any evidence of a similarly situated comparator. The plaintiff argued that the Supreme Court’s decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services overruled the requirement for a comparator. The Fifth Circuit disagreed, stating that Ames did not unequivocally overrule prior precedent or fundamentally change the focus of the analysis in a way that applied to this case. The court concluded that its previous decisions requiring a comparator remain binding.
Our rule of orderliness binds us to a previous panel’s decision absent an intervening change in the law.
Texas v. United States, 126 F.4th 392, 406 (5th Cir. 2025)
What it means going forward
Employment discrimination plaintiffs in the Fifth Circuit must still produce evidence of a similarly situated comparator to survive summary judgment under the McDonnell Douglas framework.