Even fair processes can't protect employers if discipline isn't applied consistently
Even thorough workplace investigations may not protect employers from discrimination lawsuits if discipline is applied inconsistently across racial lines.
The Fourth Circuit delivered that stark message to employers on January 6, 2026, when it revived a Black police officer's discrimination case against the Baltimore Police Department, despite the city having conducted a two-year investigation that culminated in findings against the officer at a formal hearing.
In Wanda Johnson v. Baltimore City, Maryland; Baltimore Police Department, the appeals court ruled that Wanda Johnson, an African American officer, had presented enough evidence of discriminatory treatment to proceed with her lawsuit. Johnson was forced to resign in June 2022 after an administrative trial board sustained charges that she committed assault, failed to notify supervisors, and made false statements during an internal investigation. The case stemmed from a 2018 nightclub altercation where Johnson witnessed a colleague, Sergeant Marlon Koushall, punch a woman in the face.
After Johnson testified before a grand jury in January 2019 about the incident, Internal Affairs opened an investigation into her conduct that June. Johnson later testified against Koushall at his criminal trial in fall 2019, where he was convicted of second-degree assault and misconduct in office.
The Baltimore Police Department believed it had done everything right in investigating Johnson. It spent two years gathering evidence. It held a two-day hearing in May 2022. It gave Johnson advance notice, access to case files, legal representation, and the chance to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses. The trial board reviewed all the evidence and sustained every charge against her.
But the federal appeals court found that none of that necessarily matters if other employees outside the protected class received better treatment for comparable misconduct.
Johnson pointed to 13 white or non-Black officers who she says committed similar or worse offenses but kept their jobs. Some were merely suspended. Others had their charges dropped entirely. Several were later promoted.
The most glaring example involved Koushall himself. Despite his criminal conviction for assault and misconduct from that same nightclub incident, he was never terminated or forced to resign. He remains employed by the department today.
Johnson also identified a white female officer with multiple sustained use-of-force violations and false statement charges who was not suspended and was later promoted in rank. Another white female officer involved in domestic assault and charged with making false statements had her trial board dismissed and was later promoted to sergeant. A white male officer involved in the same domestic incident was promoted to lieutenant.
One non-Black female officer allegedly made false statements that body camera footage directly contradicted, yet faced no charges at all.
The district court had dismissed Johnson's case, reasoning that none of these officers were similar enough because they had not been found to have committed the exact same combination of offenses Johnson did through a trial board process.
The appeals court disagreed. Writing for the majority, Judge Thacker said the law does not require a perfect match. Johnson alleged at least six officers charged with assault and seven charged with making false statements, all of whom avoided the termination she faced. That was enough to let her case proceed.
The decision drew a sharp dissent from Judge Wilkinson, who argued the majority was undermining the Baltimore Police Department's legitimate efforts to improve accountability. The department has been working under a federal consent decree since 2017 after investigators found widespread integrity and credibility problems in its ranks.
Wilkinson emphasized that Johnson had charges sustained against her after a fair process, while many of her proposed comparison officers faced only rumors or unproven allegations. He warned that the ruling would make it harder for police departments to rid themselves of untrustworthy officers.
The court did affirm dismissal of Johnson's retaliation claim, finding she could not show her protected activity caused her termination since the disciplinary charges were filed in June 2020, eight months before she filed her discrimination complaint in February 2021. It also rejected her claim that the city maintained a pattern or practice of discrimination, saying she offered only general allegations without specific examples beyond her own case.
For human resources professionals, the takeaway is uncomfortable but clear. A defensible investigation and legitimate findings of employee misconduct may not be enough to avoid discrimination liability. What matters equally is whether you have applied the same standards consistently to everyone else who has done something similar, regardless of race.
The case heads back to district court, where discovery will likely probe every disciplinary decision the Baltimore Police Department has made in recent years.
