What ties all of these stories together is a common theme, one in which, employers make a conscious decision to ignore the law, exploit workers and deprive entire groups of their constitutional rights.

In doing so, the punishment is often nothing more than another financial transaction. By law, the forms of remedy available to victims of these practices is largely limited to monetary restitution. No matter the intent, the outcome is always the same…but should it be?

Is it legally sufficient for a judge or a regulatory agency to order a company to pay a monetary fine after it has reduced an entire group of people into a state of second-class citizenship?

The right course of justice, in these situations, is for employers to face criminal sanctions. An approach that has historical precedence.

Shortly after the Brown v. Board decision, numerous institutions of higher- learning sought to delay racial integration on college campuses. Some places, like the University of Texas, deliberately opted into paying fines, rather than integrating. Other places, like the University of Alabama, were staunch segregationists and refused to budge.

In both instances, it wasn’t until judges began to issue criminal sanctions that integration finally took root.

Former Gov. Ross Barnett (AL). Opposed integration efforts until he was held in criminal contempt.

Aside from the historical aspect, the simple fact that employers can create such a large number of victims, all of whom are targeted as a result of their membership in a protected group, and in open contempt of civil rights laws, justifiably warrants criminal prosecution.

In no other area of our legal system, can someone willfully target so many people, and be limited in terms of punishment solely to monetary fines.

The hidden lesson behind the Brown decision has largely been overlooked in the passage and implementation of the Civil Rights Act. Yet, it is the missing puzzle piece to the type of civil rights enforcement that is capable of creating true social equality.