News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Retaliation

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 -
DRI

From Protest to Arrest: Navigating First Amendment Retaliatory Arrest Claims

DRI on

Protest and political activism are deeply ingrained in American culture, boasting a storied history of citizens mobilizing to advocate for change and to challenge injustices. From the Boston Tea Party during the colonial era...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Education Department’s Bid to Stay Injunctions Barring Enforcement of New Title IX Rules

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

The Court’s decision leaves in place injunctions barring ED from enforcing the new regulations in over 20 states and against nearly 700 institutions of higher education. The Education Department (ED) released new Title IX...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

California Employment Law Notes - July 2024

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Employee Who Wanted To Donate/Freeze Her Eggs Was Not Protected By Pregnancy Statute - Paleny v. Fireplace Products U.S., Inc., 103 Cal. App. 5th 199 (2024) - Erika Paleny alleged harassment, discrimination and...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS 2023/24 Lookback and Preview: 8 Key Rulings that Impact the Workplace and 4 New Cases for Employers to Track Next Term

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court issued several momentous decisions last term that will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...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

Epstein Becker & Green

Not the Day We Are Waiting For - SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

With a significant mass of cases left to decide and only a few weeks to issue the opinions, the U.S. Supreme Court has reduced the backlog by four yesterday. None of them, however, resolves the future of Chevron deference or...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

US Supreme Court Applies Strict Test for NLRB Injunctions

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

In unusual circumstances arising during unionization campaigns, the National Labor Relations Board can seek a so-called Section 10(j) injunction to immediately order the employer or union to cease illegal acts associated with...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - June 20, 2024

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued four decisions today: Moore v. United States, No. 22-800: This case concerns the constitutionality of the Mandatory Repatriation Tax (“MRT”) included in the 2017 Tax Cuts and...more

Houston Harbaugh, P.C.

SCOTUS: Whistleblowers need not prove retaliatory intent under Sarbanes-Oxley Act

Houston Harbaugh, P.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that proving an employer’s retaliatory intent is not required for whistleblowers seeking protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 144 S. Ct. 445 (2024),...more

Seward & Kissel LLP

Employment Litigation Roundup - May 2024

Seward & Kissel LLP on

May 2024 NJ Supreme Court holds that non-disparagement provisions cannot prohibit disclosure of details relating to claims of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment - The New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously held that...more

Miller Canfield

Michigan Supreme Court Expands Liability Under Anti-Discrimination Statute; Endorses Third-Party Retaliation Theory

Miller Canfield on

“Third party” or “associational” retaliation is reprisal taken by an employer against someone other than the person who engaged in “protected conduct.” In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s anti-retaliation...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

Proskauer Rose LLP

Broadway Ruling Puts Discrimination Claims In The Limelight

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Does the First Amendment right to free speech permit an employer to hire or fire an employee based on race? On its face, the proposition may seem absurd, especially as we approach the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act...more

ArentFox Schiff

SCOTUS Holds That SOX Whistleblowers Are Not Required to Prove Retaliatory Intent

ArentFox Schiff on

In a victory for whistleblowers, a unanimous US Supreme Court has held that a whistleblower invoking the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1514A(a) (SOX) is not required to prove that his or her employer acted with...more

Dechert LLP

Supreme Court Shifts Whistleblower Protection Landscape

Dechert LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court on February 8, 2024, held in a unanimous decision that whistleblowers do not need to show retaliatory intent in order to establish protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”), 18 U.S.C....more

NAVEX

Supreme Court Gives a Boost to Whistleblowers

NAVEX on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently gave whistleblowers an easier path to win retaliation lawsuits they file, making the always delicate task of handling corporate whistleblowers that much more delicate. Compliance and HR teams...more

Poyner Spruill LLP

Whistleblower Risks: United States Supreme Court Clarifies Burden of Proof

Poyner Spruill LLP on

In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split, holding that whistleblowers asserting retaliation claims under Sarbanes-Oxley must prove protected activity was a contributing factor...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Supreme Court Reverses Second Circuit in Favor of Whistleblower Plaintiff, Holding That SOX Plaintiffs Need Not Prove Retaliatory...

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Second Circuit’s decision in Murray v. UBS and resolved a circuit split in favor of employees, holding that although intent is an element of a Sarbanes-Oxley...more

Lathrop GPM

Lower Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers Established in Landmark Supreme Court Case

Lathrop GPM on

Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC holding that whistleblowers are not required to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under...more

Fisher Phillips

Snapshot on Workplace Safety: Will SCOTUS Whistleblower Ruling Have Broader Impact on OSHA Investigations?

Fisher Phillips on

Welcome to this edition of the FP Snapshot on workplace safety, where we take a quick snapshot look at a recent significant workplace law development that affects your safety and health programs. This edition is devoted to...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

United States Supreme Court Endorses Low Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U. S. ____, 2024 WL 478566 (2024), the United States Supreme Court (Sotomayor, J.) held that whistleblowers do not need to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be...more

Goulston & Storrs PC

SCOTUS Issues Decision with Significant Implications for Future Whistleblower Cases

Goulston & Storrs PC on

On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U.S. ___(2024), a case involving a former UBS employee’s claim that he was terminated for making an internal report...more

BakerHostetler

Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC - Whistleblower Retaliation Without Need to Prove Retaliatory Intent

BakerHostetler on

On February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) unanimously ruled in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC that employers can violate whistleblower protection statutes without evidence establishing retaliatory...more

The Volkov Law Group

Supreme Court’s Unanimous Decision Provides Important Protections for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblowers

The Volkov Law Group on

In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the whistleblower protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the case, Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC et al. (February 8, 2024).  The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms an...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Holds Proof of Retaliatory Intent Not Required for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Claims

Jones Day on

The Background: In August 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC., et al. ("Murray") that an employee suing his employer under the anti-retaliation provisions of...more

318 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 13
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