In Part I, this Article details the key features of Title VII’s history, explaining the statute, the significant role the Supreme Court has played in its interpretation, and the history of congressional intervention to override Supreme Court decisions on key issues. Part II reviews the existing evidence for and against an ideological interpretation of Title VII’s case law. Part III introduces the political science models of judicial decision making and applies the models to Title VII. Part III also details the models’ evidence of ideological voting by the Supreme Court and matches this evidence with voting patterns in Title VII cases. Part III further examines the challenge of the exceptions, that is, the cases where the Justices did not vote according to their ascribed ideology in interpreting Title VII. Part III also explores whether the political science models can explain these exceptions while still maintaining the basic premise of ideological voting. Concluding in Part IV, this Article asserts that the Supreme Court is particularly ideological in its decision making on issues of minority rights and, as a result, many of the typical constraints on the Court have not affected, and will not affect, its ideological interpretation of Title VII.