US v Windsor Discrimination

News & Analysis as of

The Supreme Court’s Same-Sex Marriage Ruling & Its Employment Implications

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you probably are well aware that on June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that same sex couples have a constitutional right to marry and have their marriages recognized across the...more

A First Look at the Workplace Implications of Same-Sex Marriage Equality

We asked attorneys writing on JD Supra to share with us their initial thoughts on the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court's Obergefell decision in favor of same-sex marriage equaliy, especially with the regard to the...more

The U.S. Supreme Court Finds a Constitutional Right to Same-Sex Marriage: Implications for Employee Benefit Plan Sponsors

On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a historic decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses require states to allow same-sex marriage and to...more

Same-Sex Marriage Recognized as Valid in Non-Recognition State for Purposes of Interpreting the Bankruptcy Code

As a result of two Federal trial court decisions issued May 19, 2014 and May 20, 2014, Oregon and Pennsylvania became the 18th and 19th states where gay and lesbian couples can legally marry. In these decisions, U.S....more

Labor And Employment Law 2013: A Year-End Review

I. New Laws and Regulations - A. Federal - Following U.S. Supreme Court Decision, Federal Agencies Extend Definition of “Spouse” to Persons in Same-Sex Marriages. In United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675...more

Monthly Benefits Update - December 2013

The following are the most significant employee benefits-related legal developments that occurred in December of 2013. At the beginning of 2013, after considering feedback from our clients and contacts who work in the...more

Labor And Employment Observer - 2013/2014

In This Issue: Message from the Chair; Social Media and the Workplace: 2013 and Beyond; Unpaid Internships: Training Ground or Legal Landmine?; Supreme Court’s Nassar Decision Sets Higher Causation Standard for a...more

Federal District Court (In Its Capacity As An Employer) Must Reimburse Employee for the Cost of Health Benefits for her Same-Sex...

The Ninth Circuit Judicial Council, an administrative body that reviews decisions of the court’s chief judge, recently weighed in on an issue involving same-sex domestic partner health benefits in the post-Windsor world. The...more

The ERISA Litigation Newsletter; November 2013

In This Issue: - Labor and Employment and ERISA Class Actions After Wal-Mart and Comcast — Practice Points for Defendants (Part I – Commonality)* - Agencies Release Guidance on HRAs, FSAs, and Employer Payment...more

Immigration Alert: October 2013

I. USCIS Instructs on Immigration Benefits for Same-Sex Spouses - On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States ("SCOTUS") held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") was unconstitutional....more

Employment Law -- Sep 12, 2013

Federal Agencies Respond to Supreme Court’s DOMA Ruling - In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to strike down part of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), federal agencies are starting to respond with new...more

Labor Letter, September 2013: Employers Go "Two For Two" – Three Times Over: A Review Of The 2012-13 Supreme Court Term

Looking back at the recently-completed 2012-2013 Supreme Court term, employers should have reason to feel good about how things turned out. In fact, of the six major decisions that impact employers and can be categorized in...more

Legal Alert: Fall of the DOMA-n Empire: Practical Employee Benefits Implications

On June 26, the U.S. Supreme Court decided United States v. Windsor, striking down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as unconstitutional and holding that same-sex marriages recognized under state law...more

Employee Benefits Challenges After the Supreme Court’s DOMA Ruling

The ruling on Wednesday by the Supreme Court of the United States, that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, will immediately extend to legally married same-sex couples a host of federal...more

DOMA is Gone, What Effect Does it Have on Immigration?

The Supreme Court unequivocally affirmed that there is no legitimate reason for the federal government to discriminate against married couples on account of their sexual orientation. In United States v. Windsor, the Justices...more

Landmark US Supreme Court Decision May Extend US Tax Benefits to UK Civil Partners

On Wednesday, 26 June 2013, the US Supreme Court ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), which limits the definition of “marriage” to “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife” and...more

DOMA is Doomed as Windsor Expands Federal Employment Benefits and Protections to Married Same-Sex Couples

In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) in its landmark decision, United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. __ (2013). ...more

U.S. Supreme Court Declares DOMA Unconstitutional: What You Need to Know

What an exciting week! I’m pleased to share the following alert regarding DOMA that my colleagues Lisa Cukier, Christine Fletcher and Peter Zupcofska put together today for clients and friends of our firm. As we celebrate...more

U.S. Supreme Court Ruling: Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA")

While the U.S. Supreme Court(the “Court”) ruled section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) unconstitutional, that does not mean that the changes for human resources departments and employee benefits plans can be...more

DOMA struck down - what this means for your employee benefits plans

On Wednesday the US Supreme Court ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. We believe that this ruling will require employers to review and possibly amend many of their retirement and...more

Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) held Unconstitutional by United States Supreme Court

After hearing arguments in March, yesterday — in a landmark 5-4 decision — the Supreme Court struck down DOMA. DOMA was section 3 of a 1996 law which explicitly defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman for...more

Supreme Court Decides the Fate of Same-Sex Marriages

On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decisions in two same-sex marriage cases. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, No. 12-144, the Court ruled that the proponents of a popular voter initiative that reversed...more

US Supreme Court Weighs-In on Same-Sex Marriage

For Canadians, yesterday’s landmark same-sex decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court probably seems ho-hum. In Ontario, it’s been over 10 years since the Court of Appeal held that the legal definition marriage cannot exclude...more

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Defense of Marriage Act is Unconstitutional

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The decision in United States v. Windsor means that same-sex couples who are married under state law...more

The Supreme Court Decision on the Defense of Marriage Act: An Employer’s Perspective

In a closely watched and eagerly anticipated decision, the Supreme Court, in United States v. Windsor, __ U.S. ___ (June 26, 2013) has overturned Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which limited the definition of...more

46 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2

"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*

*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.
×