Civil Rights Constitutional Law

Read Civil Rights updates, alerts, news, and legal commentary from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

High Court Finds UT Austin Race-Conscious Admissions Process Constitutional

In a 4-3 decision on Thursday, June 23, 2016, the United States Supreme Court upheld the University of Texas’s (UT) race-conscious admissions program. The decision addressed only UT’s specific admissions policy in effect...more

Fisher, the Sequel: Supreme Court Upholds Public University’s Affirmative Action Program

On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the race-conscious admission program that a public university used for undergraduate admissions was lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the...more

United States Supreme Court Approves Race-Conscious Admissions Policy

On June 23, 2016, in its second trip to the United States Supreme Court, the High Court ruled in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, et al. No. 14-981 (June 23, 2016) that the University of Texas’ (“UT”) race-conscious...more

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Affirmative Action Program at University of Texas

On June 23, 2016, in its second time hearing Fisher v. University of Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin. The Court held that the program is...more

Supreme Court Upholds University of Texas Affirmative Action Admissions Policy

The Supreme Court has rejected a challenge under the Equal Protection Clause to the University of Texas at Austin’s race-conscious admissions program in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (“Fisher II”). This...more

Supreme Court Decides Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, No. 14-981, holding that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permits the University of Texas’ use of race-conscious...more

United States Supreme Court Upholds University of Texas Affirmative Action Policy

In a 4-3 decision released today, in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the United States Supreme Court affirmed that the University’s race-conscious admissions policy meets strict judicial scrutiny and is lawful under...more

The Supreme Court - June 2016

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in two cases on June 6, 2016: Simmons v. Himmelreich, No. 15-109: Respondent Walter Himmelreich, an inmate at a federal prison, brought two suits against prison...more

Five on Friday – Five Recent Developments that We’ve Been Watching Closely: June 2016

It’s Friday and time for another overview of developments in the field of business and human rights that we’ve been monitoring. This week’s post includes: new guidance for boards of directors on business and human...more

Supreme Court Update: Foster V. Chatman (13-8349), Green V. Brennan (14-613) And Wittman V. Personhuballah (14-1504)

Just one new decision today (along with the first cert grant in ages). In United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. (No. 15-290), the Court held that a jurisdictional determination by the Army Corps of Engineers...more

An overview of Bill S-201: An Act to prohibit and prevent genetic discrimination

On May 3, 2016, Bill S-201, An Act to prohibit and prevent genetic discrimination, was given its first reading in the House of Commons. Originally introduced and recently passed in the Senate as a private Member’s bill, the...more

Federal Court Allows the EEOC to Conduct Investigation on Employer’s Premises Without Employer Consent or a Warrant

Many employers are familiar with the fact that the EEOC regularly conducts on-site workplace investigations after receiving charges of discrimination or harassment. A recent federal court decision, however, may lead to an...more

Supreme Court Decides Foster v. Chatman

On May 23, 2016, the United States Supreme Court decided Foster v. Chatman, No. 14-8349, holding that it was clearly erroneous for a state habeas court to decide that a criminal defendant failed to show purposeful...more

Supreme Court Update: Green V. Brennan (14-613), Wittman V. Personhuballah (14-1504) And Foster V. Chapman (14-8349)

Three more decisions this morning—Green v. Brennan (14-613), holding that the 45-day limitations period for a constructive-discharge action under Title VII begins to run after the employee gives notice of his resignation;...more

The Supreme Court - May 2016 #3

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in three cases on May 19, 2016: CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 14-1375: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought a suit in its own name...more

Why Can’t We Be Friends? The Supreme Court Discovers an Unexpected Meeting of the Minds in Zubik v. Burwell

Regardless of one’s preferred metaphor, the Supreme Court of the United States is adept at ducking, punting, and otherwise avoiding messy and socially divisive interpretive issues. Every once in a while, the parties even help...more

No Knocking Necessary: Court Rules EEOC Can Enter Employer’s Premises Without Warrant Or Consent

Seyfarth Synopsis: Court ordered enforcement of the EEOC’s subpoena and authorized the Commission to conduct an on-site investigation without the employer’s consent. The EEOC has conducted on-site inspections of...more

Fourth Circuit Holds that “Sex” Under Title IX Incorporates Gender Identity

Seyfarth Synopsis: The Fourth Circuit in a case of first impression held that Title IX entitles transgender students to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity. Though that ruling only discusses Title IX, the...more

Employment Practices Newsletter - May 2016

Department of Labor's Persuader Rule Convinces No One - The Department of Labor's controversial Final Rule on Persuader Reporting became effective April 25, 2016. The Rule significantly strengthens a union's rights under...more

April 2016: Five Biggest Labor And Employment Law Stories

The world of labor and employment law is always rapidly evolving. In order to make sure that you stay on top of the latest developments, here is a quick review of the five biggest stories from last month that all employers...more

Landmark Discrimination Case: Fair Housing Act Thwarts NIMBYs - Avenue 6E Investments, LLC v. City of Yuma (March 25, 2016)

Why It Matters: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a decision in favor of the City of Yuma, Arizona, and concluded instead that there was sufficient evidence to present to a jury that the City had rejected the...more

Vote YES! for Compliance: An Election Law Refresher for California Employers

Seyfarth Synopsis: Under California law, employers have a part to play in protecting employee voting rights and other political activity. What follows is a short reminder of employer duties and obligations. With the...more

Massachusetts High Court Examines Disparate Impact Theory in Light of Recent Supreme Court Decision

A ruling last week by Massachusetts' highest state court demonstrates courts' vigorous examination of disparate impact housing claims in light of recent judicial guidance, as well as the type of proactive measures property...more

Claims to Accommodate Flying Spaghetti Monster-ism Hit the Wall in Nebraska Court

On April 12, 2016, a district court in Nebraska rejected the religious accommodation claims advanced by a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.1 In denying the religious accommodation claims, the court was...more

Fourth Circuit Holds That Title IX Protection Extends to Transgender Restroom Access

On April 19, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in a highly publicized decision, issued a ruling which addresses the rights of transgender students under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act...more

1,479 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 60

Follow Civil Rights Updates on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×