Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 28: Construction Compliance with Joan Moore and Mim Munzel of The Arbor Consulting Group
Webinar: Is Your DEI Policy Setting You Up for a Lawsuit?
#WorkforceWednesday: NLRB Wants Shuttered Starbucks Stores Reopened, Big Tech Retreats from DEI Programs, and Employers Scrap College Requirements - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: The Ripple Effect of the Supreme Court’s SFFA Ruling for Diversity in the Workplace - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VII-134-Panel Discussion on Supreme Court's Affirmative Action Ruling and the Impact on Employer DEI Programs
DE Under 3: How to Lawfully Engage in Race-Based Employment Decisions
The Labor Law Insider: Recent U.S. Supreme Court, NLRB Decisions Highlight Labor Issues in Higher Education
Business Better Podcast Episode: Is DEI at Risk? Considerations on the US Supreme Court Ruling Against Affirmative Action Programs
DE Under 3: 4 Implications Impacting Federal Contractors & Employers Following the SCOTUS Decision in the Harvard & UNC Cases
DE Under 3: SCOTUS Finds “Race-Based” Admissions Practices At Harvard and UNC Unlawful
DE Under 3: The Harvard and UNC Case Decisions Are Coming
DE Talk | Top 5 Actions to Take After You Complete Your Affirmative Action Plan
An Update on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Consumer Financial Services Industry, with Special Guest Naomi Mercer, Senior Vice President for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, American Bankers
DE Under 3: The Coming Harvard & UNC Case Decisions and NLRB’s Memo on Electronic Surveillance and Organizing
DE Under 3: Recent Carnegie-Mellon Report Calls Accuracy of Census Data into Question
DE Under 3: OFCCP Walks Back Its Earlier “Pay Equity” Directive
DE Under 3: EEOC Quietly Denys FOIA Requests, Pay Data Study Results & OFCCP Clears Up AAP Portal “Deadline” Confusion
DE Under 3: Secretary Walsh Intervenes in Court, Religious Exemption Updates, & AAP Verification Deadline Extension Developments
DE Under 3: USDOJ’s Settlement Affecting Recruiters, OFCCP’s AAP Verification Deadline Extension & SCOTUS’ New Ruling
On September 30, 2019, the District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued its long-awaited opinion in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, _ F. Supp. 3d. _, 2019 WL 4786210,...more
A few weeks ago, the United States District Court of Massachusetts issued its long-awaited decision in the lawsuit brought by Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. (“SFFA”) against Harvard University (“Harvard”). In a 130-page...more
In a much anticipated decision, Judge Allison Burroughs of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts held this week that Harvard College’s admission’s policy, which considers race among many factors, is lawful....more
Many employers who have read about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent affirmative action decision are wondering what impact, if any, the ruling will have on them. After all, the main issue in that case was the propriety of a...more
On June 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court held for the second time that race may be taken into account when public universities and colleges admit students. In a 4-3 decision (Justice Kagan recused herself based on her prior...more
On June 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion for the second time in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, (Fisher II), a case that directly questioned whether race can be considered at all in college...more
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
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
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
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
The U.S. Supreme Court today affirmed the University of Texas at Austin's admissions program, which permits consideration of an applicant’s race as one of a number of factors in admissions decisions. Justice Kennedy authored...more
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
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 first Monday in October is the traditional first day of a new U.S. Supreme Court term. As always, the 2015-16 term will have several cases that are of particular interest to the nation’s employers. Here is a review of...more
On September 27, 2013, the U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Education released a document entitled “Questions and Answers About Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin.” This is the first guidance released by...more
In an Opinion authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy for a 7-1 majority, the United States Supreme Court in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, et al., allowed public colleges and universities to retain their affirmative...more
As we and just about everyone else have noted, Justice Kennedy, writing for a 7-to-1 majority of the Supreme Court of the United States, sent the hot potato Fisher case back to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to “assess...more
The big news this week in education is the U.S. Supreme Court’s 7-1 decision in Fisher v. University of Texas. In Fisher, the Court held that the lower court should not have taken at face value the University’s claim that it...more
On Monday, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in the affirmative action case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. In a 7-1 decision (Justice Kagan recused herself because she had previously worked on...more
Justice Kennedy, in an opinion joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Breyer, and Sotomayor, wrote that public universities’ race-conscious admissions policies are constitutionally permissible and...more
Windsor v. United States - Issue: Can the federal government define marriage? Holding: No. Loser: The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was passed in 1996 and signed by President Clinton, was...more
In a 7-1 opinion, the United States Supreme Court concluded in Fisher v. Univ. of Texas, No. 11-345 (June 24, 2013) that lower courts had failed to apply a rigorous enough scrutiny to the University of Texas' use of racial...more
This week the Supreme Court issued three decisions that may significantly impact federal contractors and other employers: In Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 11-345 (U.S. June 24, 2013), the Supreme Court held that a...more
In Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 11-345 (U.S. June 24, 2013), the Supreme Court vacated the Fifth Circuit's decision upholding a university's affirmative action plan that considered race as one of the factors in its...more
In a 7-1 decision (in which Justice Elena Kagan did not participate), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit applied the incorrect strict...more