The "after-acquired evidence" defense allowed employers to circumvent the merits of a discrimination claim by arguing they could have legitimately fired an individual for a reason if they had known about it at the time. While the US Supreme Court, in McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co., prohibited the use of after-acquired evidence as a complete bar to employment discrimination claims, it held that this evidence was relevant to the issue of relief. Accordingly, McKennon will not completely curb management's desire to investigate an employee's past in search of evidence. The incentive of reducing damages and other equitable relief remains. At the same time, the holding gives courts and plaintiffs an equitable exception to limiting damages in cases where it would be unfair to apply the "no front pay, no reinstatement" rule. The decision clearly benefits discrimination plaintiffs in jurisdictions where the doctrine was most harshly applied. This article considers case law in the 2 years since McKennon to see how plaintiffs have fared and to determine what is left of the after-acquired evidence defense. Notes