The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico issued an opinion in July 2020 finding that an individual’s status as an ex-offender is not a protected class under Puerto Rico’s Constitution.[1]
The case arose following a hospital’s denial of medical privileges to a physician. The physician claimed the denial constituted discrimination based on his prior criminal conviction and violated his constitutional right to rehabilitation. Specifically, the physician claimed being an ex-offender was a category protected by Section 1 of Puerto Rico’s Bill of Rights that prohibits discrimination based on social status and that Section 19 of Article VI establishes the commitment to promote the moral and social rehabilitation of ex-offenders.
After a long litigation battle, the case arrived at the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico which conducted an analysis under the Constitution as well as Puerto Rico’s anti-discrimination law Act No. 100 of June 30, 1959 (Act No. 100).[2] The Supreme Court provided a legislative history of Act No. 100 noting it had been amended several times in years past to include new protected classes none of which referenced ex-offender status.
Further, the Supreme Court pointed to other legislation, such as Law No. 254 of July 27, 1974 (related to the issuance of Police Certificates) as evidence that employers may consider a candidate’s criminal history. Based on its analysis, the Supreme Court determined that having a prior criminal history is a “not unique to a particular social or economic class.” Thus, the Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff’s discrimination claims.
The case arose following a hospital’s denial of medical privileges to a physician. The physician claimed the denial constituted discrimination based on his prior criminal conviction and violated his constitutional right to rehabilitation. Specifically, the physician claimed being an ex-offender was a category protected by Section 1 of Puerto Rico’s Bill of Rights that prohibits discrimination based on social status and that Section 19 of Article VI establishes the commitment to promote the moral and social rehabilitation of ex-offenders.
After a long litigation battle, the case arrived at the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico which conducted an analysis under the Constitution as well as Puerto Rico’s anti-discrimination law Act No. 100 of June 30, 1959 (Act No. 100).[2] The Supreme Court provided a legislative history of Act No. 100 noting it had been amended several times in years past to include new protected classes none of which referenced ex-offender status.
Further, the Supreme Court pointed to other legislation, such as Law No. 254 of July 27, 1974 (related to the issuance of Police Certificates) as evidence that employers may consider a candidate’s criminal history. Based on its analysis, the Supreme Court determined that having a prior criminal history is a “not unique to a particular social or economic class.” Thus, the Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff’s discrimination claims.
Note the preceding was based on a rough translation of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico’s opinion. Consultation with qualified legal counsel is recommended.
[1] See Garib Bazain v. Hospital Español Auxilio Mutuo de Puerto Rico, Inc.
[2] Originally this law’s primary concern was to address issues related to age. However, over time several additional protected classes have been added including: sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, political affiliation, political or religious ideas, be a victim or be perceived as a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking, be in the military, ex-military, serve or have served in the Armed Forces of the United States, or have veteran status.