The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) guarantees employees unpaid leave following certain qualifying events.  The FMLA not only provides substantive rights but also prohibits retaliation against employees who exercise those rights.  When employees face unlawful retaliation, they can bring retaliation claims against their employers.  However, there is disagreement among courts as to how to evaluate these claims.  More precisely, courts are split concerning whether employees must prove their use of leave was a but-for cause of retaliation, or merely that it was one of an employer’s mixed motives for retaliating.  The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second and Eighth Circuits have held that a mixed-motive causation standard applies, while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has required a but-for causation standard.

This Note advocates for the mixed-motive causation standard, grounding the analysis in statutory interpretation, purpose, and policy.  The mixed motive standard best allows plaintiffs to successfully vindicate their statutory rights and aligns most clearly with Congress’s intent, contemporaneous understandings of law, and the language of the FMLA.