In the "same actor" defense,the court reasons that there is no violation of the ADEA in dismissing a worker because:
A) the worker satisfied the relevant criteria to be hired (presumably including age), and later was demoted or fired, it is unlikely that age would be the motivating factor
B) the same actor both hired and fired the worker, so age was likely not the motivating factor
C) the worker ("the actor") fired performs in the same manner as when they were hired, it is unlikely that age is the motivating factor
D) all of the employer's employees are older workers

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A number of appellate courts, including the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits, have adopted a defense called the "same actor" defense to age discrimination claims. The circuit courts have applied various weights of strength or value of the defense when the hirer and firer are the same actor. These courts have held that when the same "actor" both hires and fires a worker protected by the ADEA, there is a permissible inference that the employee's age was not a motivating factor in the decision. After all, if someone held discriminatory beliefs about older workers, why would that person have hired the worker in the first place?

In the "Same Actor" Defense,the Court Reasons That There Is