Right, affirmed lower court by refusing to hear the case, the 8th circuit sustained the decision of a lousy supervisor who told the plaintiff to resign. The company had and has facilities.

EDIT: See post 4 for good factual rundown.

Read the ACTUAL EIGHTH CIRCUIT DECISION that was appealed:
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/14/03/123780P.pdf

There was NO breastfeeding ban or any restriction against it. In fact, the company was trying to help her resolve the problems, and she gave them 5 hours on her first day back before resigning and then claiming constructive termination.

I have no problem with the appellate court's finding or the Supreme Court's decision not to review. The decision was based on whether or not she was "constructively terminated" because the breast feeding options were not provided for in exactly the way she wanted them within the first 5 hours of returning to work. The decision said that the company was bending over to try to accommodate her within their ability. It noted that she did not fill out the paperwork to get a security badge for the lactation facility before returning to work, the company tried to accommodate her temporarily in medical facilities until her paperwork could be processed in the next 3 days or less.

The original, outright untrue article in the post that's cited above, claimed that the court threw her case out while holding that she wasn't treated in a sexist fashion because men can also lactate. What fantasy! The article, and now this particular post with yet another creative reinterpretetion, gets 4 flaming pants stars for fiction.