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

Press Release
Sep 10, 2026
Hinshaw Attorneys Recognized as 2027 Lexology Index Thought Leaders: USA

In The News
Sep 10, 2026
Nicholas Ajello and Gregory Emry Analyze FAA’s Proposed BVLOS Drone Regulations

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 9, 2026
“Play Now, Arbitrate Later”—“Not So Fast,” Ninth Circuit Says

In The News
Sep 9, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Discusses “Patchwork” of Laws Targeting Personalized Pricing

Employment Law Observer
Sep 8, 2026
Five Workplace Issues Every Employer Should Address Before They Become a Costly Lawsuit

Press Release
Sep 8, 2026
Jim Sandy Appointed Chair of ABA Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Subcommittee

In The News
Sep 3, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Analyzes FTC Suit over Amazon’s Advertising Pricing Practices

In The News
Sep 2, 2026
Yvonne Ocrant Discusses Horse Business Legal Protection on the EquineRevShare Podcast

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 2, 2026
Two Key Wins for Mortgage Lenders on Illinois Statute of Limitations

Press Release
Sep 2, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Reappointed to CBA's Antitrust & Trade Regulation Section Executive Committee


