Yes, the Chicago Club is a real private club. The court decided that the club is the perfect example of what a private club is. It's owned by its members, it doesn't advertise, and it's extremely strict about who gets in and who can use the building. The government argued that since members sometimes invite guests or get paid back by their companies for hosting events, the club isn't really private. The court thought this argument was 'ridiculous,' saying that having guests is a normal part of a private club. The judges were shocked the government even brought the lawsuit, basically saying, 'If this place isn't a private club, then no club is.'

Yes, the Chicago Club is a special kind of private club that doesn't have to follow certain work rules because it is very private, careful about who can join, and follows special tax rules. The Club only lets members and their guests use its space, the members control the Club, and the Club doesn't advertise to the public for new members. It's very hard to become a member of the Club. You have to be suggested by current members and approved by the leaders. Having private events and letting guests in sometimes doesn't change the fact that it's a private club. So, the court agreed with the Club and said it doesn't have to follow the work rules the EEOC wanted it to follow.

Yes, the Chicago Club qualifies as a bona fide private membership club under § 2000e(b). The court rejected the EEOC's attempt to import a constitutional 'associational liberty' analysis from Title II into the Title VII context, finding the statutory text of § 2000e(b) to be clear and unambiguous. Applying the EEOC's own three-part framework for determining privacy, the court found the Club easily qualifies: it is owned and controlled by its members, it does not advertise to the public, and it strictly limits facility access to members and their guests. The court dismissed the EEOC's arguments that allowing members to host functions for non-member organizations or that a few isolated instances of non-member use compromised its privacy. Furthermore, the court held that the Club employs meaningful and selective conditions of membership through its intensely personal, member-driven screening and selection process, the effectiveness of which is demonstrated by the exclusive composition of its membership.

Yes, the Chicago Club qualifies as a bona fide private membership club under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b) because it is private, employs meaningful conditions of limited membership, and meets the tax exemption criteria. The Club limits the use of its facilities to members and their authorized guests, is controlled by its membership, and does not publicly advertise for members or promote the use of its facilities to the general public. The Club's membership is highly selective, with candidates undergoing a rigorous screening process involving member proposals, seconds, and board approval. The Club's practices of hosting private functions and allowing limited guest access do not compromise its overall private status. Therefore, the Club is exempt from Title VII's regulations as a bona fide private membership club, and the district court's judgment is affirmed.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. The Chicago Club

Case Podcast

Rule of Law:

The Legal Principle

Facts:

Procedural Posture:

How It Got Here

Issue:

Legal Question at Stake

Opinions:

Majority, Concurrences & Dissents

Analysis:

Why This Case Matters

Gunnerbot