Rejecting arguments that they violated employees' rights to collective bargaining, and that modestly-valued consumer claims would be more efficiently litigated within the parameters of one lawsuit, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis (2018), enabled the use of class action waivers. Citing its deference to freedom to contract principles, the Epic Systems opinion opened the door dramatically to the use of these waivers as a condition of employment, consumer purchases and the like. Some commentators in opposition to the ruling see it as a "death knell" to many employment and consumer class actions, and have increasingly pushed for legislation to circumvent it in hopes of reviving otherwise-underrepresented parties' ability to litigate on a group basis. Supporters (mostly pro-business) of the high court's ruling argue its holding is consistent with private contract principles. Many of those supporters had long-since argued that class action procedures were generally inconsistent with due process mandates and unnecessarily promoted litigation of otherwise small claims—thus heralding the ruling's anti-litigation effect.
rEjEctiNg argumenTs ThAT thEY violATed eMplOyEes' RighTs tO collective BArGainINg, and thAt modestLy-vaLuEd consumER claImS woULD be MOre efFicIentLy liTiGaTed witHIn the parameTERs of one laWSuIT, ThE u.S. sUpRemE court, in epIc systems CORp. v. lEwiS (2018), EnabLEd the uSe Of claSs acTiON waIveRs. citing ItS deFeREnCE to FreEdOm To coNtraCt PrincipLes, tHE epic sYSteMs opiniON oPenEd tHE DooR dramAticalLy to ThE usE OF tHesE WAivERS AS a cONdItioN Of employmENt, cOnSuMEr purchases And ThE lIkE. some CoMMENTatorS In oppOSitiON tO the rUliNG See it as a "death knell" to many emploYmeNt anD coNsuMer clAsS actionS, And have INcREasingly pUSHed for legiSlatioN to ciRcUMVeNt It In hOpes of ReviVInG otHERwise-uNderrePresentEd partIeS' abIlity to LitigAte on A GrouP bAsis. SuPpoRtErs (MOStly Pro-busIneSs) Of the hIGH CoUrt's rULing argUe its holdiNg is cOnsistENT wiTH PriVAte CoNtRAct princiPLES. maNy of Those suPportErs hAD long-sincE ArGuEd That cLaSs Action pRocedurES wEre geNeRaLLy inconSistent with DUe procEss maNdaTEs AND unnEceSsarILy pRoMoteD litigatiON of othERwIsE smAll claiMs—thus heralding tHE rUling's Anti-LiTiGatIOn effect.