News & Analysis as of

Statutory Interpretation Civil Rights Act

Husch Blackwell LLP

Supreme Court Sets the Bar for Recovering Attorneys' Fees in Civil Rights Cases

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lackey v. Stinnie that plaintiffs who gain preliminary injunctive relief before an action becomes moot do not qualify as “prevailing parties” for attorney’s fees under 42...more

Snell & Wilmer

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Section 1988 Attorney’s Fees for Property Owners and Other Civil Rights Litigants

Snell & Wilmer on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lackey v. Stinnie, 145 S. Ct. 659 (2025), limits the ability of civil rights litigants to recover their attorney fees under the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act, specifically...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

HHS’ Withdrawal of 2022 Guidance Raises Questions about Coverage for Gender-Affirming Care

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a move with potentially significant implications for entities subject to the Affordable Care Act, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has reversed course and now contends that Section 1557 of the Affordable...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - January 21, 2025

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision today: Andrew v. White, No. 23-6573: In this case, the Court addressed whether the State violated petitioner Brenda Andrew’s due process rights when, during her...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Courts Invalidate ACA Regulations Following Demise of Chevron Deference

Ballard Spahr LLP on

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn its landmark 1984 Chevron decision, three district courts have struck down provisions in nondiscrimination regulations under the Affordable Care Act that prohibit...more

Stevens & Lee

Welcome to the Post-Chevron World: HHS on the Defensive

Stevens & Lee on

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (and its companion case, Relentless v. Department of Commerce), in which it overruled the Chevron doctrine, has received a great deal of attention...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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Chevron’s End Means Uncertainty and Opportunity for the Healthcare Industry

“Chevron is overruled.” The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 28 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and its companion case, Relentless v. Department of Commerce, will have enormous effects on the healthcare sector....more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - April 22, 2024

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in two cases: Garland v. VanDerStok, No. 23-852: This administrative law and statutory interpretation case concerns the federal government’s ability to...more

Adler Pollock & Sheehan P.C.

Supreme Court Poised to Eliminate Title VII Material Harm Requirement

Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, a key case involving the definition of an “adverse employment action” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Specifically, the Court...more

Littler

Supreme Court Appears Ready to Hold Title VII Does Not Require a Materially Adverse Employment Action – Significant Implications...

Littler on

On December 6, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) heard arguments in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri—a potentially pivotal case concerning whether Title VII requires plaintiffs to establish a...more

Fisher Phillips

4 Supreme Court Cases Employers Should Be Tracking as New Term Kicks Off

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court just began a new term, and we’re watching several cases that will likely have a big impact on the workplace. Specifically, the Court will weigh in on whether someone can “test” violations of federal...more

Littler

The Fifth Circuit Announces New Standard for Pleading a Title VII Claim

Littler on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently announced that Title VII plaintiffs are no longer required to plead an “ultimate employment decision" to properly allege a disparate treatment claim. Applying a strict...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS 2023 Lookback and 2024 Preview: 7 Critical Decisions All Employers Should Review and 3 New Cases to Track

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court’s blockbuster decisions last term dominated the headlines – and many rulings will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an...more

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

Proposed Federal Rule Seeks to Clarify Title VII’s Application to Religious Organizations

A January 13, 2023 rule proposed by nine federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, seeks to amend an assortment of regulations in order to clarify the rights and obligations of faith-based and community...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

SCOTUS Wrapup and Preview 2020

In this episode, recorded on Sept. 14, Akin Gump Supreme Court and appellate practice co-head Pratik Shah returns to review the 2019 Supreme Court Term and preview the big cases and topics in the October 2020 Term. Among...more

Franczek P.C.

Can a Transgender Female Student compete on a Girls’ Sports Team? Supreme Court Justices Address the Question in LGBT Employment...

Franczek P.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on October 8 in three closely watched cases addressing whether Title VII, which prohibits employment discrimination “because of … sex,” covers discrimination based on LGBT...more

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

SCOTUS Hears Arguments on Scope Discrimination Because of Sex Under Title VII

On October 8, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument on one core question: does the prohibition on discrimination “because of...sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 include...more

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

Positive No More: Rhode Island Employers Need to Think Twice Before Denying Employment Based on a Positive Drug Test

In a recently issued trial court decision, Callaghan v. Darlington Fabrics Corp., a Rhode Island Superior Court justice held that an employer could not deny employment to an applicant licensed under state law to possess and...more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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