Eighth Circuit: Police Officer Trainee not Limited to Title VII for Bringing Discrimination Claim
1 min read
Aug 1, 2012
In Hensley v. Sgt. Bill Brown et al., No. 11-2561, (8th Cir. July 25, 2012), a police-officer trainee claimed that while in the police academy, she was repeatedly subjected to sexually harassing comments, discriminatory actions, and physical assault by her male trainers. The trainers subsequently issued a memorandum which indicated that she would not be graduating from the academy. She then left the academy and was unable to become a police officer.
She then sued the city board of police commissioners and various individual officers claiming that she had been discriminated against in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and for violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Issues arose with respect to whether she exhausted her administrative remedies under Title VII and whether she was limited to seeking redress for these grievances under Title VII only .
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reasoned that Title VII provides the exclusive remedy for violations of its own terms and an employee seeking relief under this provision must comply with the act’s procedural requirements. Further, though an employee may not invoke a purely remedial statute (such as 42 U.S.C. § 1983) to redress a right conferred only by Title VII, where an employer’s conduct violates Title VII as well as rights conferred by an independent source, “Title VII supplements, rather than supplants, existing remedies for employment discrimination.”
Thus, the Eighth Circuit found that although Title VII provided the exclusive remedy for the trainee’s discrimination claims, its exclusivity ceased when the employer’s conduct also amounted to a violation of a constitutional right. So, where the employee asserted a violation of a constitutional right, she could sue under Section 1983 alone without having to plead a Title VII violation and comply with the act’s procedural requirements.
There exists a host of federal and state law providing bases for employees to make claims of discrimination. For that reason, it is important for employers to be aware of the employment and civil rights laws in their jurisdiction to ensure compliance with all applicable law.
Topics
Featured Insights

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
May 14, 2026
Key Takeaways from the 2026 MBA Legal Issues and Regulatory Compliance Conference

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
May 14, 2026
SCOTUS Confirms: Federal Courts Retain Power to Affirm or Vacate an Arbitration Decision

In The News
May 13, 2026
Hinshaw Contributes Chapters to “Wrongful-Death and Survival Actions” IICLE Handbook

In The News
May 12, 2026
Hinshaw GC Steve Puiszis Discusses Protecting Attorney-Client Privilege in an AI Age

Event
May 12-13, 2026
Mitchel Chargo Speaks on the Rapidly Evolving Cannabis Industry

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
May 11, 2026
Tennessee Reaches Settlement with Mariner in Multistate UDAAP Enforcement Action

Press Release
May 11, 2026
Ali Degan Elected to the Fellows of the American Bar Foundation

Press Release
May 11, 2026
John Weedon Re-Elected to the Jacksonville Bar Association’s Board of Governors in 2026

Press Release
May 7, 2026
Hinshaw Recognized as a 2026 BTI Associate Satisfaction A-Lister Firm



