On August 1, 2007, Senator Kennedy introduced the "Equal Remedies Act of 2007" (S. 1928), which would eliminate the damages caps under Title VII. The text of the bill is not yet online, but here are the Senator's remarks upon introduction:

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is an honor to join my colleagues in introducing the Equal Remedies Act of 2007 to repeal the caps on the amount of damages available in employment discrimination cases under the Civil Rights Act of 1991.

This legislation will end the glaring inequality in the current Federal antidiscrimination laws. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 gave women, religious minorities, and disabled workers the right to recover compensatory and punitive damages for intentional employment discrimination, but only up to certain specified monetary limits. By contrast, victims of such discrimination on the basis of race or national origin can recover damages without such limitations, because they can bring their cases under another statute. The Equal Remedies Act will remove this inequity by eliminating the caps on such damages under current law.

The caps were included in the 1991 act as part of a compromise that the first President Bush would sign. That legislation also reversed a series of Supreme Court decisions that had rolled back other basic civil rights protections and made it more difficult for working Americans to challenge discrimination. The 1991 Act as a whole represented a significant advance in the ongoing battle to eliminate discrimination in the workplace.

But, it's long past time to end the double standard that consigns women, religious minorities, and the disabled to second-class remedies under the civil rights laws.

The caps are especially unfair, because they deny adequate remedies to the most severely injured victims of discrimination. For example, a woman who needs extensive medical treatment as a result of severe sexual harassment, such as an assault, she will be limited to receiving only partial compensation for her injury.

The goal of providing damages is to hold employers accountable and to make victims whole to the greatest extent possible for the discrimination they suffered. The current limit prevents accountability and keeps the victim from obtaining full relief.

The caps serve no justifiable purpose. They shield the worst employers from the full consequences of the most outrageous acts of discrimination. The deterrent purpose of damages fails when employers know that their liability is limited.

Take, for example, Sharon Deters and her case against Equifax Credit Information Services. Sharon suffered constant sexual taunts and insults from her coworkers. Her supervisor praised her harassers' behavior and allowed it to continue. The jury in her case was so outraged by her employer's conduct that it awarded her $1 million in punitive damages, finding that such an award was necessary to get her employer's attention and make it change its ways. The caps on damages, however, reduced Sharon's award to $300,000.

Results like that are not fair. They fail to fulfill the statutory purpose of such damages provision, which is to deter further violations. By passing the Equal Remedies Act of 2007, Congress will be affirming the basic principle of equal justice for all Americans. I urge my colleagues to join in supporting this important change.