Supreme Court of the United States Discrimination

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

Court Tosses HUD’s Disparate Impact Rule: Is Protection for Lenders from Disparate Impact Claims on the Horizon?

Since the 1970s, courts have routinely held that the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq., may remedy housing discrimination proven through use of the disparate impact theory. The doctrine of disparate impact permits a...more

Wage and Hour Cases to Watch at the Supreme Court: Part 1--Integrity Staffing

This month marked the opening of the Supreme Court’s new term. For employment law practitioners, this session will be particularly busy with seven cases analyzing a range of employment questions, from the scope of the EEOC’s...more

Employment Law - Oct 2014 #2

EEOC Sues Over Transgender Discrimination - Why it matters: In its first cases alleging bias against transgender employees, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed suit against a Florida eye clinic and a...more

A Question To Be Answered By The Supreme Court: Should You Discuss The Obvious At Job Interviews?

Sometime next year the United States Supreme Court will decide whether a job interviewer had an obligation to inform an applicant that the interviewer has noticed that the applicant is wearing a headscarf. Put another way, on...more

Supreme Court Will Hear Three Employment Discrimination Cases

The United States Supreme Court held its traditional first of October meeting to determine which cases it will hear during the 2014-15 term. The Court has accepted three employment discrimination cases....more

U.S. Supreme Court Grants Cert. (again) in FHA Disparate Impact Case

On October 2, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, et al. v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., No. 13-1371, a case in which the Fifth Circuit became the first...more

An Employer Should Never Ask About Disability Or Religion. Except When It Should.

Everybody knows that an employer should never, ever, ever ask an applicant about religion or disability until after a conditional offer of employment has been made. And maybe not even then. Right?...more

Third Time's the Charm? Supreme Court Agrees Again To Hear FHA Disparate Impact Case

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed for the third time in recent history to decide whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). The Supreme Court granted the Texas Department of...more

Workplace Law Has Come a Long Way, Baby!

In 1964, Nicholas Katzenbach, the Attorney General of United States, ordered Ollie's Barbecue, a tiny restaurant in Birmingham, Ala., to desegregate. When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that order, the newly passed Civil...more

EEOC Addresses Interplay Between Pregnancy Discrimination Act and ADAA: The First Detailed Update to Pregnancy Bias Guidance Since...

On July 14, 2014, the EEOC issued Updated Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination, as well as a set of Questions and Answers and a Fact Sheet related to that Guidance. This is the EEOC's first detailed update to its...more

Fifth Circuit Issues Important Ruling on Affirmative Action in Higher Education

Earlier this week, in Fisher v. University of Texas, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the undergraduate admissions program at the University of Texas at...more

PDA and Young: Pregnancy Discrimination Law to Break from Its Infancy

On the heels of the Hobby Lobby decision in late June, the Supreme Court has signaled that women’s health issues in the workplace will continue to be a central issue by granting a petition for certiorari in Young v. United...more

U.S. Supreme Court Denied Petition Seeking Review of Fourth Circuit’s Interpretation of Wal-Mart v. Dukes

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Family Dollar Stores, Inc.’s petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Scott, et. al. v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc., No. 12-1610 (4th Cir....more

Supreme Court Agrees to Resolve Current Appellate Court Split on EEOC’s Conciliation Obligations

In December 2013, we reported on the Seventh Circuit’s controversial decision in EEOC v. Mach Mining, in which the Court exacerbated the already existing split amongst federal appellate courts regarding the EEOC’s obligation...more

50 for 50: Five Decades of the Most Important Discrimination Law Developments - Number 37: The Supreme Court Raises The Bar On...

Throughout this series, we have discussed how common retaliation claims have become and how challenging the courts have found it to define “causation” in the context of Title VII cases. Those two trends intersected recently...more

50 For 50: Five Decades Of The Most Important Discrimination Law Developments - Number 27: Discrimination and Harassment Policies...

Before Title VII, employee handbooks were rare and, if they existed, they were small pamphlets explaining intra-office procedures. It wasn’t until the proliferation of lawsuits under Title VII that employers began to craft...more

50 For 50: Five Decades Of The Most Important Discrimination Law Developments - Number 23: After-Acquired Evidence

“You did what? If I Hadn’t Already Fired You, I’d Fire You Now!” What if? This is the question that has followed Title VII since its inception: how do you apply this revolutionary (yet seemingly straightforward) prohibition...more

50 for 50: Five Decades of the Most Important Discrimination Law Developments - Number 18: When Is An Employer Liable For...

Although Title VII was passed in 1964, it wasn’t until 1998 that the United States Supreme Court handed down two significant decisions in the companion cases of Faragher v. Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) and Burlington...more

50 for 50: Five Decades of the Most Important Discrimination Law Developments - Number 13: Equal Pay Gets A Boost In The Obama...

The Equal Pay Act, which mandates equal pay between the sexes for equal work, actually became law before Title VII, in 1963. While EPA claims often accompanied Title VII sex discrimination claims, there were some...more

50 for 50: Five Decades of the Most Important Discrimination Law Developments: Number 4: In 1991, Congress Broadens the Law

By the late 1980’s, the legal battles concerning employment discrimination had become increasingly mature and several cases had been decided by the United States Supreme Court favorable to employers. In the Civil Rights Act...more

50 for 50: Five Decades of the Most Important Discrimination Law Developments: Number 3: In 1986, The Supreme Court Recognizes...

It’s hard to imagine now, but from 1964 to 1986, “sexual harassment” as it is known today did not exist. That all changed when the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson. It was that...more

Florida Supreme Court Decides that Florida Civil Rights Act Prohibits Pregnancy Discrimination

On April 17, 2014, the Florida Supreme Court resolved a certified conflict between two of Florida’s district courts of appeal, to hold that the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) prohibits pregnancy discrimination. To read the...more

Orrick's Antitrust and Competition Newsletter - April 2014

Shanghai High People’s Court Rules That Resale Price Maintenance Agreement Constitutes Monopolistic Agreement - The Shanghai High People’s Court recently made available its Aug. 1, 2013 final judgment overruling the...more

Disparate Impact In Fair Lending: A Theory Without A Basis And The Law Of Unintended Consequences

The disparate impact theory of discrimination allows the government or a private plaintiff to establish discrimination based solely on the outcome of a neutral policy, without having to prove any actual intent to...more

Employment Flash - February 2014

In This Issue: - US Supreme Court Rules on Donning and Doffing Issue - NLRB Judge Invalidates Arbitration Agreement Without Class Action Waiver - Second Circuit Rules on Single Employer Liability Under the WARN...more

150 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 6