State attorneys general are united in championing a new cause – abolishing clauses that require sexual harassment claims to be heard in arbitration. But would it set a bad precedent for changing federal law while scoring political points for its supporters?

"(T)his could start a proverbial 'slippery slope' to trying to amend the Federal Arbitration Act whenever a social or political issue becomes inflamed," said Ballard Spahr Partner Alan S. Kaplinsky.

"Right now, the issue is politically charged. It is politically correct to say you support an FAA amendment because if you oppose it, people say you're supporting the harassers. That is not a principled basis for amending a federal statute that has stood the test of time for almost a century."

"While no one is denying the legitimacy of the 'Me Too' movement, employees are often given a contractual right to opt out of the arbitration clause within a certain time frame, and that is a better way to accommodate an individual's desire to go or not go to court if a particular dispute arises, rather than piecemeal chipping away a[t+] the FAA itself," he said.

Read the full article here. Subscription may be required.