This employment discrimination case turned on whether the term "employees" specified in Section 704(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes former employees. The majority of circuits had broadly interpreted "employee" to include former employees "as long as the alleged discrimination is related to or arises out of the employment relationship." The en banc Fourth Circuit, however held that the plain language of the provision excluded former employees and upheld the district court's determination that former employees may not bring suit under Section 704(a) for retaliation occurring after termination of their employment.The Supreme Court reversed on 2/18/97, holding that former employees are included with Section 704(a)'s protection. In an opinion delivered by Justice Thomas, a unanimous Court held that "employees" as used in Section 704(a) was ambiguous as to whether it included former employees. The Court reasoned that the broader context and purpose of Title VII supported an expansive interpretation of "employees" and that exclusion of former employees would undermine the effectiveness of the statute by allowing the threat of post employment retaliation to deter employees from filing complaints with the EEOC.