I think LP has done a satisfactory job with the dissent, but I do not find ot persuasive on the liability question. LFP relies very heavily on the McCarran Ferguson Act, but the Court's decision does not regulate the business of insurance. Rather, the Court is using Title VII to regulate an employer's employment practices. The McCarran Ferguson Act has never permitted a State to authorize employment practices just because those practices involve insurance. Since the employer in Manhart was a self-insurer, LP's argument would have been much more appropriate in that case.
Madans, A.S. Clerk Memo, Arizona Governing Comm. V. Norris, 463 U.S. 1073 (1983). Box 367, Harry A. Blackmun Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.