In a federal case, if a woman alleges discrimination by her employer after being fired, what is the likely court's response to the employer's motion for summary judgment?

In this scenario, the correct answer—denying the motion for summary judgment due to the existence of factual disputes—reflects the fundamental nature of what summary judgment entails. A motion for summary judgment is typically granted only when there is no genuine dispute of material fact, meaning that the evidence presented by the non-moving party (in this case, the woman alleging discrimination) is sufficient to raise a question that a reasonable jury could answer in her favor.

When an employee claims discrimination, it often involves nuanced situations, such as the motivations behind the employer's actions or the context of the termination. These aspects can be heavily fact-dependent, meaning that different interpretations of the same facts might lead to different conclusions about whether discrimination occurred. If there are conflicting accounts or evidence regarding the reasons for her dismissal or the treatment she received compared to others, these disputes would necessitate a trial where the evidence is fully explored and assessed by a jury.

This process highlights the court's role in ensuring that cases involving substantial questions of fact do not get resolved without allowing all parties the opportunity to present their evidence and arguments fully in a trial setting. Therefore, the likelihood of a court's response to the employer's motion for summary judgment would indeed be to deny it, thus allowing