Argued February 4, 2025 Decided April 18, 2025

No. 23-7141

SAMUEL SHANKS, APPELLANT

v.

INTERNATIONAL UNION OF BRICKLAYERS AND ALLIED CRAFTWORKERS, APPELLEE

Consolidated with 23-7145

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:23-cv-00311) (No. 1:23-cv-00309)

Samuel Shanks, pro se, was on the briefs for appellant.

Taylor Lambert, pro se, was on the briefs for appellant.

Gail S. Coleman, Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, argued the cause for amicus curiae in support of appellants. With her on the brief were Karla Gilbride, General Counsel, Jennifer S. Goldstein, Associate 2 General Counsel, and Dara S. Smith, Assistant General Counsel.

Alexandra Mansbach, appointed by the court, argued the cause as amicus curiae in support of certain of appellants’ claims. With her on the briefs were Ruthanne M. Deutsch and Hyland Hunt, appointed by the court.

Kathleen Keller argued the cause for appellee. With her on the brief was Kara A. Naseef. Caitlin Kekacs entered an appearance.

Before: PILLARD and GARCIA, Circuit Judges, and ROGERS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion for the Court by Senior Circuit Judge ROGERS.

ROGERS, Senior Circuit Judge: Before the court are appellants’ remaining allegations of discrimination by their employer, appellee. The court affirmed in part the dismissals of the pro se complaints for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and appointed amicus curiae to present arguments in favor of the claims unsuited to summary dismissal.1 Upon review after briefing and oral arguments, the court affirms the judgments of dismissal except on claims of disparate impact and discriminatory treatment that cross the line from conceivable to plausible, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 680 (2009). That aspect of the district court orders is reversed and remanded.

1 The court expresses appreciation of the assistance provided by amicus curiae. 3 I.

Appellants are former employees of the International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers. Each sued the Union as their employer in 2022, proceeding pro se in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Samuel Shanks worked in accounting for over twenty years and alleged discrimination based on his disability, race, color, and sexual orientation. He also alleged that the Union management subjected him to a hostile workplace due to those characteristics and retaliated against him for his workplace advocacy. He alleges that the Union violated the D.C. Human Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and “other applicable Civil Rights Acts.” Taylor Lambert, his niece who began working for the Union as a temporary employee in 2015 and became a full-time employee in 2019, alleged wrongful termination, retaliation, and discrimination by the Union based on her race, religion, and gender in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and “other Civil Rights Acts.”

Following the Union’s federal-question removal of the cases to the federal court, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), the district court granted the Union’s motions to dismiss the pro se complaints for failure to state a claim, FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). Shanks v. Int’l Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers, No. 23-311, 2023 WL 6199078, at *6 (D.D.C. Sept. 22, 2023); Lambert v. Int’l Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers, No. 23-309, 2023 WL 6388953, at *6 (D.D.C. Sept. 29, 2023). Shanks and Lambert appealed, and this court affirmed in part the judgments of dismissal and appointed amicus to present any potent