News & Analysis as of

Discrimination › Supreme Court of the United States

Discrimination is prejudicial treatment related to (or inappropriate consideration of) an individual's actual or perceived membership in a particular class, group or category, such as an individual's... more +
Discrimination is prejudicial treatment related to (or inappropriate consideration of) an individual's actual or perceived membership in a particular class, group or category, such as an individual's race, religion, gender, age, to name a few.  less -
K&L Gates LLP

Applying Loper Bright, the Seventh Circuit Holds that ECOA Protects Prospective Applicants

K&L Gates LLP on

The Seventh Circuit recently issued one of the first appellate decisions to apply the US Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 144 S. Ct. 2244 (2024). In Loper Bright, the Supreme Court ended...more

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP

Ten Years after Shelby County: The Effect of Ending Preclearance on Voting Rights

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP on

In 2013, a divided Supreme Court held in Shelby County v. Holder that Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was unconstitutional, ending its preclearance requirement in states with a history of discriminatory voting...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

New Title IX Regulations Halted in Additional States and at Hundreds of Institutions as Department of Education Continues to...

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

With the August 1, 2024, effective date of the Department of Education’s April Title IX regulations (Final Rule) just weeks away, court action in pending lawsuits challenging the Final Rule across the country continues. The...more

DirectEmployers Association

OFCCP Week In Review: July 2024 #4

DirectEmployers Association on

The DE OFCCP Week in Review (WIR) is a simple, fast and direct summary of relevant happenings in the OFCCP regulatory environment, authored by experts John C. Fox, Candee J. Chambers and Cynthia L. Hackerott. In today’s...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

What U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Standing Tells Us About Challenges to Corporate DEI Initiatives

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court held that a group of doctors, nurses, and medical associations did not have the right under the U.S. Constitution, a doctrine known as “standing,” to challenge Food and Drug Administration (FDA)...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

The man who said "no" to DEI training, and four lessons for employers

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

Employer's DEI mandate scores a win. A white guy refused to take his employer's mandatory "unconscious bias" training, and he was fired. He sued the employer for retaliation, his lawsuit was dismissed, and this week an...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Title VII Employment Claims

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employees alleging employment discrimination to show they suffered an adverse employment action as a result of their membership in a protected class....more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Title IX Regulations Enjoined in Six More States

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

On June 17, Chief Judge Danny Reeves of the Eastern District of Kentucky issued a preliminary injunction staying the effective date, and enjoining enforcement, of the new Title IX regulations in the states of Indiana,...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

Employers Beware: Title VII Now Allows Employees to More Easily Challenge Your Decision to Transfer or Reassign Them

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Gender-Affirming Care Remains a Hot Topic in 2024

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

Our April 9 blog post highlighted several issues to watch during 2024, one of which was gender-affirming care considerations. Just over a month later, there have now been three key developments with respect to that issue:...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Navigating the Rock & the Hard Place: Conflicting Federal and State Mandates for LGBTQ Employees

Foley & Lardner LLP on

“The rock and the hard place.” How often do employers find themselves here? If employers have LGBTQ employees in certain states, they are now bumping up against the “rock” of federal laws, like Title VII and Title IX, and the...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Get with the Pronoun: Eleventh Circuit Rules Pervasive Misgendering Is Harassment

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more

Jaburg Wilk

US Supreme Court Lowers the Threshold Harm Required for Employees to Maintain Title VII Discrimination Claims

Jaburg Wilk on

In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court held that an employee need only show “some harm” to maintain a Title VII discrimination claim against an employer for a lateral job transfer. Background - After nine...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

No More Adjectives… Just Some Harm: Supreme Rules on Title VII Job Transfer Threshold

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

If you transfer an employee to a job with no loss in pay or title but the employee thinks it is less desirable, can that employee sue you for discrimination under Title VII? While it depends on the facts, in Muldrow v. St....more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Supreme Court Holds That Employees Need Not Show “Significant” Harm to Support a Title VII Discrimination Claim Based on a Job...

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a lateral job transfer can – in certain circumstances – be an illegal adverse action and support a claim for a lawsuit for unlawful discrimination. This...more

Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP

Lateral Transfers and Reassignments Resulting in “Some Harm” May Now Give Rise To Actionable Discrimination Under Title VII

Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP on

For decades, employers have depended on the rule that transferring or reassigning an employee would not give rise to an actionable discrimination claim, as long as such an action did not “significantly” change an employee’s...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

SCOTUS Lowered the Threshold of Harm Required for Title VII Discrimination Claims

Ballard Spahr LLP on

Last week, on April 17, 2024, the US Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., that an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)...more

Saul Ewing LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split Concerning Title VII Actions Related to Workplace Transfers

Saul Ewing LLP on

On April 17, 2024 the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split over the standard to apply to Title VII discrimination cases challenging job transfers, ruling that discriminatory workplace transfers are prohibited even if...more

Perkins Coie

Muldrow Sets a New Standard for Workplace Discrimination

Perkins Coie on

On April 17, 2024, in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employer may violate Title VII’s anti-discrimination provisions when it transfers an employee even if the transfer did...more

Butler Snow LLP

Muldrow v. City of St. Louis: The Supreme Court Opens the Door for Discriminatory Job Transfer Claims

Butler Snow LLP on

On Wednesday, April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court provided an opening for workers to allege employment discrimination claims regarding job transfers based on sex, race, religion, or national origin. In Muldrow v....more

DirectEmployers Association

OFCCP Week In Review: April 2024 #4

DirectEmployers Association on

Tuesday, April 16, 2024: Federal Trade Commission Poised to Issue Final Rule to Prevent Most Worker Non-Compete Agreements - The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) is on the brink of issuing its Final Rule that would...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

SCOTUS Relaxes Standards for Title VII Plaintiffs in Workplace Discrimination Claims

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, No. 22-193, 2024 WL 1642826 (U.S. Apr. 17, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an employee alleging that an involuntary lateral job transfer constituted workplace discrimination in...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies When Job Transfers Can Serve as a Basis for Title VII Claims

Foley Hoag LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis that rejected a heightened injury standard for Title VII claims based on job transfers and held that employees alleging discrimination...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Supreme Court Rules Discriminatory Job Transfers Need Not Produce “Significant” Harm to be Actionable Under Title VII

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court ruled on the standard under which a plaintiff can proceed with a claim for a discriminatory job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”),...more

Saul Ewing LLP

Supreme Court Declines to Review Magnet School Admissions Policy Which Targeted a More “Diverse” Student Body and Shaped Racial...

Saul Ewing LLP on

On February 20, 2024, the United States Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in Coalition for TJ v. Fairfax County School Board. Coalition for TJ involves an admissions policy at a prestigious public...more

281 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 12
Next »

"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 Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide