What do you think about the arguments of the opponents of the Ledbetter act? I've read several blogs by business people and labor lawyers (on the employer side) who worry about increased insurance costs because, e.g., this makes it possible for someone to bring a suit because of discrimination [allegedly] occurring 40 years ago.

I know the point of your entry isn't to address this side of the issue–I'm just curious as to your opinion.

This, of course, was necessary because of Chief Justice Roberts opinion that if their was a loophole advantaging corporate interests, he was going to find it and use it….which he did.

Roberts didn't care anything about the INTENT of the original law and made Congress needlessly repeat legislation.

Talk about citations omitted:
"But the evidence suggests otherwise. Study after study has, for example, cast grave doubt on what appears to be the myth that sex discrimination in the workplace remains rampant more than 40 years after Congress adopted one law broadly banning job discrimination and another requiring equal pay for women and men doing equal work."

No mention of where these "studies and studies" are located, of course.