⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

A pregnancy-discrimination lawsuit becomes a Supreme Court dispute about a defense raised late. Jasmine Younge served as deputy chief of staff and director of policy and programs for the elected district attorney in Fulton County, Georgia. She says she was fired two weeks after announcing her pregnancy and sued under Title Seven, the federal employment-discrimination law. The office later invoked the personal-staff exception to that law's definition of employee, saying her senior role put her outside its coverage. That defense was missing from the office's answer, its formal response to her complaint. After discovery, the evidence-gathering stage, the office raised it and later sought summary judgment: a ruling without trial. The lower courts allowed the defense, finding that the delay had not unfairly harmed Younge's case, and ruled against her. The Supreme Court is examining that procedural ruling, not deciding whether pregnancy discrimination occurred. An affirmative defense supplies a separate legal reason to defeat a claim. Prejudice here means unfair litigation harm, not personal bias. Eric Schnapper will ask the Court to require the normal standards for amending an answer, including good cause when scheduling rules apply. Stephen Petrany will defend the office's position that a late legal defense is permissible when nothing material could have changed.

Younge v. Fulton Judicial Circuit District Attorney's Office (No. 25-352) — Supreme Court of the United States, argued November 2, 2026.