News & Analysis as of

Equal Protection

The Equal Protection Clause is a section of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution that provides that "no state shall...deny to any citizen within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the... more +
The Equal Protection Clause is a section of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution that provides that "no state shall...deny to any citizen within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Essentially, the Equal Protection Clause provides that the government must treat an individual the same way that it treats other individuals in the same circumstances. The 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause applies only to state governments, but the requirements of the clause apply to the federal government through the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment. less -
Epstein Becker & Green

A Headliner Upholding a State Ban on Transition Care for Transgender Minors Leads the Latest Five Decisions - SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

To anyone who has followed the case of United States v. Skrmetti, especially those who attended or listened to the oral argument, the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6–3 holding that a Tennessee law prohibiting certain medical...more

Partridge Snow & Hahn LLP

Higher Ed: New Lawsuit Challenges Federal Grant Program for Hispanic-Serving Institutions - Partridge Snow & Hahn

Partridge Snow & Hahn LLP on

A new lawsuit will test the legality of grant programs of the U.S. Department of Education for colleges and universities, charging that these programs unlawfully discriminate based on race or ethnicity....more

Woods Rogers

Supreme Court’s Skrmetti Decision Redefines Legal Landscape for Gender-Affirming Care for Youth

Woods Rogers on

On Wednesday, June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a landmark 6-3 decision in United States v. Skrmetti, directly addressing the constitutionality of state laws banning gender-affirming care for...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Supreme Court Upholds Tennessee Transgender Care Ban

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a widely awaited for decision, the Supreme Court in a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Roberts held that a Tennessee law which prohibits certain medical treatments (puberty blockers and hormones) for transgender minors,...more

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

Repeated Assaults of Kindergartner on School Bus Lead to Various Federal Law Claims

Tucker Arensberg, P.C. on

In October 2023, a five-year-old girl (Roe) in the Red Lion Area School District (District) was reportedly physically and sexually assaulted by a male student while riding a school bus. After this incident, no measures were...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Supreme Court Upholds Tennessee Law Prohibiting Gender-Affirming Care for Children

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

On June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for minors does not classify on the basis of sex in ways that would require heightened scrutiny under the Equal...more

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

Failure to Address Harassment Supports Discrimination Claims

Tucker Arensberg, P.C. on

Jane Doe v. Riverside Sch. Dist., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231380 (M.D. Pa., Dec. 23, 2024).  After a classmate was convicted for sexual assault of a student outside of school, the student’s family alleged the School District...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - June 18, 2025

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions today: United States v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477: This case addresses a constitutional challenge to Tennessee’s Prohibition on Medical Procedures Performed on Minors...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Supreme Court Upholds Tennessee’s Ban on Gender-Affirming Care

Epstein Becker & Green on

On June 18, 2025, in the case of United States v. Skrmetti, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care—concluding that the law does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Majority-Group Plaintiffs Are Not Subject to a Heightened Evidentiary Standard Under Title VII

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Jackson in Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Services, ruling that the “background circumstances” test—which applies a heighted...more

Akerman LLP - HR Defense

Supreme Court Eliminates “Background Circumstances” Test in Reverse Discrimination Cases: What Employers Need to Know

Akerman LLP - HR Defense on

In a landmark ruling significantly changing how workplace discrimination claims are litigated, the U.S. Supreme Court has removed a major barrier for plaintiffs alleging “reverse discrimination” claims under Title VII. In...more

Littler

Federal Court Partially Blocks Enforcement of Parts of Executive Orders on DEI and Gender Identity

Littler on

On June 9, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a ruling in San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, temporarily blocking the enforcement of several provisions in executive orders issued...more

Polsinelli

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Requirement for Majority Groups in Title VII Cases

Polsinelli on

What You Need to Know: Equal Protection Under Title VII: On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Title VII’s protections apply equally to all individuals, regardless of whether they are in a...more

Woods Rogers

Supreme Court Reaffirms Equal Access to Title VII Protections

Woods Rogers on

In a unanimous decision issued June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services vacated a Sixth Circuit ruling that imposed a higher evidentiary burden on majority-group plaintiffs in Title...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Prima Facie “Background Circumstances” Test for Majority Group Plaintiffs

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court vacated the dismissal of a heterosexual woman’s Title VII claims, concluding that she was improperly subjected to a heightened prima facie standard that required her to show...more

Lathrop GPM

U.S. Supreme Court Says “Reverse Discrimination” Is Equally Unlawful - Clarifies Standard for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title...

Lathrop GPM on

The U.S. Supreme Court today swung wide open the door for all persons who experience employment discrimination based on their race, color, religion, sex or national origin to bring suit under Title VII of the 1964 Civil...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Texas Judge Strikes EEOC Guidance Protecting Transgender Employees

Ballard Spahr LLP on

A federal judge in Texas issued a decision on May 15, 2025, striking down portions of the EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on protections against employment discrimination based on gender identity and/or sexual orientation....more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

The demise of disadvantaged business enterprises

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

The U.S. DOT agrees to end contract goals for DBEs. In 1983, Congress enacted the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program, which requires that the Department of Transportation spend ten percent of federal highway...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

DOT’s DBE Program Faces Major Overhaul After Lawsuit Settlement Proposal

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

In Mid-America Milling Company v. United States Department of Transportation, Case No. 3:23-cv-00072 (“Mid-America”), the Plaintiffs challenged the United States Department of Transportation’s (“DOT”) use of a rebuttable...more

PilieroMazza PLLC

DBE Program in Peril: Recent Legal Challenges and What They Mean for Women- and Minority-Owned Contractors

PilieroMazza PLLC on

Recent legal challenges jeopardize the future of the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program, a long-standing initiative designed to support minority- and women-owned businesses in...more

Goulston & Storrs PC

Equal Protection Not on the Menu This Time

Goulston & Storrs PC on

In North End Chamber of Commerce (“NECC”) v. City of Boston, the NECC and several restaurants in the North End neighborhood of Boston (“Plaintiffs”) filed suit against the City of Boston (“City”), alleging that the City...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Disparate Impact Liability Under Fire

Epstein Becker & Green on

On Wednesday, April 23, 2025, President Trump signed EO 14281, titled Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy (EO), stating a new Trump Administration policy “to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in...more

Offit Kurman

Due Process in South Carolina Then and Now: Lessons from George Stinney's Case

Offit Kurman on

George Stinney was fourteen years old when he was arrested for the murder of Betty June Binnicker and Mary Emma Thames in Alcolu, South Carolina. He is one of the youngest Americans sentenced to death and executed in the 20th...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Achieving DEI Compliance…On Your Website

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI) efforts, and the term itself, have become increasingly scrutinized and subjected to legal challenges by both government and private actors, making an understanding of the current DEI...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

New Executive Order Seeks to Eliminate Disparate-Impact Liability

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP on

On April 23, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order (EO) titled Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.  This EO seeks to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in various contexts, arguing that...more

870 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 35
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