News & Analysis as of

Sex Discrimination

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Title IX Legal Challenges Mount as Colleges and Universities Enter New Revenue-Sharing Landscape

Higher education institutions and student-athletes are navigating continuing uncertainty about institutional revenue-sharing payments and the Title IX implications of the landmark House v. NCAA settlement....more

Bricker Graydon LLP

[Ongoing Program] Level 2 Title IX Coordinator Training - July 22nd - 23rd, 2:00 pm - 5:00 pm ET

Bricker Graydon LLP on

Summer 2025 Higher Education Title IX Training Series - As the legal landscape across higher education continues to to evolve, it's essential for educational institutions to stay diligent and prepared. Our Summer 2025...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS to Determine Whether States Can Ban Transgender Athletes From Women’s Sports – What Your School Needs to Know

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court will soon decide whether states can ban transgender high school and college athletes from participating on female sports teams at their schools. After initially declining to review this issue in 2023 and...more

Venable LLP

Title IX Goes Head to Head with Antitrust: NCAA NIL Settlement Challenged by Female Student-Athletes in House v. NCAA

Venable LLP on

For anyone who thought an unprecedented $2.8 billion settlement agreement actually resolved one of the many murky issues of student-athlete compensation in college athletics —not so fast. On June 6, federal Judge Claudia...more

Montgomery McCracken

Supreme Court to Decide Legality of Trans-Athlete Bans

Montgomery McCracken on

As the Supreme Court Prepares to Decide the Legality of Trans-Athlete Bans, Schools Must Ready Themselves for Far-Reaching Precedent Addressing “On the Basis of Sex” On July 3, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Latest Moves by Federal Agencies Regarding Gender-Affirming Care: Risks Mount for Providers

Epstein Becker & Green on

Since day one, a policy priority of the Administration has been to discourage and prevent gender-affirming care for children and adolescents that involves surgery or medication....more

Maynard Nexsen

Supreme Court Brings Clarity to "Reverse Discrimination" Claims

Maynard Nexsen on

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion holding that Title VII does not impose a heightened or different burden of proof for majority-group plaintiffs. Simply put, “reverse discrimination” Title VII claims...more

DCI Consulting

[Webinar] Summer 2025 Update: Affirmative Action for Federal Contractors - July 23rd, 2:00 pm - 2:30 pm EDT

DCI Consulting on

The first half of 2025 brought unprecedented changes for federal contractors seeking to comply with federal affirmative action requirements. The rescission of Executive Order 11246 via Executive Order 14173 upended decades of...more

Jones Day

U.S. Supreme Court Ends Heightened Evidentiary Hurdle for "Majority Group" Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Cases

Jones Day on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services and held that a "majority group" plaintiff in a Title VII case need not satisfy a heightened evidentiary burden to establish a prima-facie...more

Fisher Phillips

In the Crosshairs: Untangling the Legal Landscape on LGBTQ+ Workplace Rights Under Title VII

Fisher Phillips on

The EEOC recently updated its workplace harassment enforcement guidance to reflect a Texas federal court ruling that found the Biden-era EEOC had overstepped its authority by requiring bathroom, dress, and pronoun...more

Cranfill Sumner LLP

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects “Background Circumstances” Requirement for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Cranfill Sumner LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held on June 5, 2025, that majority group plaintiffs are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard of showing “background circumstances” to establish a prima facie case of...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Supreme Court Sides with Heterosexual Woman: Majority Plaintiffs and Minority Group Plaintiffs Alike Need the Same Evidence of...

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On June 5, 2025—in the midst of heightened scrutiny of diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) initiatives triggered by executive orders issued by President Trump as well as various federal agency guidance—the Supreme Court...more

Morgan Lewis

On the Basis of Sex: HHS Rescinds Prior Section 1557 Guidance Interpreting Sex-Based Discrimination

Morgan Lewis on

The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has rescinded several pieces of informal guidance, including its 2021 interpretation of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (Section 1557), in response to executive...more

Whiteford

Employment Law Update: EEO-1 Employer Reporting Is Due June 24, 2025

Whiteford on

Employers remain obligated to complete and submit their EEO-1 reports, even with the current administration’s aggressive reworking of the anti-discrimination landscape. Federal mandatory reporting requirements require private...more

TNG Consulting

Using Pattern-Based Evidence in Title IX Investigations and Decision-Making 

TNG Consulting on

In Title IX investigations and decision-making processes, especially in word-against-word complaints where direct evidence is limited, pattern evidence can provide valuable clarity. When available and applicable, it offers a...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Supreme Court Rejects “Background Circumstances” Requirement for Title VII Discrimination Claims in Ames v. Ohio Department of...

Bricker Graydon LLP on

In a unanimous decision issued on June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court held the “background circumstances” requirement imposed by some lower courts in what are often referred to as “reverse discrimination” claims is...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

McGlinchey Stafford

SCOTUS Ames Decision: Everyone’s in a “Protected Class”

McGlinchey Stafford on

In employment law, we traditionally think of discrimination as applying to minority groups: African Americans, women, homosexuals, or other legally protected groups. In analyzing discrimination claims, one of the first...more

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

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

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

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

Clark Hill PLC

SCOTUS’s Ames Decision Provides a Roadmap for Title IX Lawsuits Brought by Male Plaintiffs

Clark Hill PLC on

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264 (U.S. June 5, 2025), the Supreme Court held unanimously that the “background circumstances” rule imposed by some lower courts, requiring members of a...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Yes, Menstrual Cramps May Qualify as a Disability Under ADA

If a qualified job candidate asks to reschedule a second-round interview due to severe menstrual cramps associated with endometriosis, is that a request for an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act? If you...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Reverse Discrimination Lawsuits Are So Back

Ballard Spahr LLP on

On June 5, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court eliminated the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard for majority plaintiffs (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) who claim discrimination under Title VII (also known as reverse...more

Cole Schotz

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Reversal for Title VII “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Cole Schotz on

On June 5, 2025, in a 9-0 opinion, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that members of a “majority group” do not have to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard to prevail on a...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

SCOTUS Rejects Heightened Standard for Title VII Majority Group

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264, (U.S. June 5, 2025), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that majority group plaintiffs (in this instance, a heterosexual plaintiff) do not need to meet...more

2,772 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 111

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