The Court did leave open the possibility that a plaintiff could sue beyond the 180-day period if she did not, and could not, have discovered the discrimination earlier. The plaintiff in this case, Lilly Ledbetter, characterized her situation as one where 'disparate pay is received during the statutory limitations period, but is the result of intentionally discriminatory pay decisions that occurred outside the limitations period.' In rejecting Ledbetter's appeal, the Supreme Court said that 'she could have, and should have, sued' when the pay decisions were made, instead of waiting beyond the 180-day statutory charging period. This was a case of statutory rather than constitutional interpretation, explaining the meaning of a law, not deciding its constitutionality. 1981, which has a four-year deadline for suing over race discrimination. The decision did not prevent plaintiffs from suing under other laws, like the Equal Pay Act, which has a three-year deadline for most sex discrimination claims, or 42 U.S.C. Ledbetter's claim of the “paycheck accrual rule” was rejected.

Justice Alito held for the five-justice majority that each paycheck received did not constitute a discrete discriminatory act, even if it was affected by a prior decision outside the time limit. Employers cannot be sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 over race or gender pay discrimination if the claims are based on decisions made by the employer 180 days ago or more.

618 (2007), is an employment discrimination decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Pay act