Courts Consistently Back the City
In May, an Eleventh Circuit panel upheld U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash’s 2022 ruling dismissing her claims, concluding that the allegations were either filed too late or lacked sufficient evidentiary support.
But Baines argued the appeals court failed to apply the Supreme Court’s April 2024 ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which lowered the bar for employees alleging discrimination. She insisted that, under Muldrow, conduct outside the statutory time window still contributed to the hostile environment that ultimately cost her job.
Petition Argues City Weaponized Its Policies
Baines also told the justices that Shahar kept her close specifically to continue harassment, altering her work assignments, removing her from cases after she rejected advances, and ultimately shaping the conditions for her termination.
She further argued the city dragged out her return-to-work process—delaying opportunities and providing a pretext for firing her.
Accusations of a Systemic Cover
Baines said both the trial and appellate courts overlooked Atlanta’s alleged avoidance of her complaints and its retaliation through administrative leave and the fitness-for-duty requirement.
“An employer cannot be allowed to subject a disabled employee to a pretextual fit-for-duty examination and termination to avoid remedying a sexually hostile work environment,” she wrote, warning that the ruling effectively rewards municipalities for merely having policies—regardless of whether they enforce them.
Her petition invoked Monell v. Department of Social Services (1978), arguing that allowing the Eleventh Circuit’s decision to stand shields local governments from liability even when their practices contradict their written policies.
