1. Do you agree with the majority or dissenting opinion in the case? Why?

Yes based on the law and only because it was not the components needed for it to be a class action law suit. However, on the other hand No I don’t agree with it because the women could have been discriminated against and had the necessary evidence to prove that they were discriminated against, but because certain aspects needed to file the class action lawsuit they were not successful. 2. Is the decision a moral one pursuant to Utilitarian ethics? Why or why not? No, because the verdict was not good for everyone as a whole and based on this ethic the verdict benefitted Wal-Mart and Wal-Mart only. These women were in no form or shape compensated for how they were under paid etc. and this brought on more feelings of worthlessness and unfair conditions for the women who already felt things were not fair at their place of employment from the beginning.
3. Is the decision a moral one pursuant to Kantian ethics? Why or why not? Kantian ethic looks at everything as a moral practice, is it right, is it ethical, and is it good for all involved even if what you are doing is considered to be legal. In my perspective, the decision was a legal one but no morally correct based on the definition of Kantian ethics. The judges just dismissed the case simply by the law and not by the entire picture as a whole and looking at the facts and taking in consideration the amount of women that filed the same