News & Analysis as of

Title VII

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII... more +
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII has been subsequently extended to discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and sexual stereotypes and to prohibit sexual harassment. Title VII applies to all employers with fifteen or more employees including private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions.  less -
Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Muldrow Decision Should Result in Supervisor Training on Legal Risks From Workplace Changes

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis that has resulted in profound changes to when employees can claim discrimination relating to job decisions that do not appear to have much...more

Smith Anderson

Supreme Court of the United States Rejects Extra Burden for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Cases

Smith Anderson on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, significantly impacting how majority-group discrimination claims are evaluated under Title VII of the...more

Warner Norcross + Judd

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Standard for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Claims

Warner Norcross + Judd on

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that courts cannot apply a heightened evidentiary standard to majority-group plaintiffs when deciding discrimination claims. The...more

Littler

Senate Committee Questions DOL, EEOC Nominees

Littler on

On June 18, 2025, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions held a hearing to consider four key nominations for leadership roles at the U.S. Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity...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

DCI Consulting

Is EEO Cool Again? Part I: EEO Compliance Isn’t DEI

DCI Consulting on

Over several decades, DCI has dedicated substantial efforts to evaluating equal employment opportunity (EEO) compliance programs and anti-discrimination initiatives. Typically managed within an organization's Human Resources...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

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Yes, Menstrual Cramps May Qualify as a Disability Under ADA

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

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

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer

The Supreme Court rejects a heightened summary judgment standard for majority group plaintiffs in Title VII discrimination cases

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Ames v Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that plaintiffs in the majority group within a protected class have the same burden of proof at summary judgment to demonstrate...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

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC on

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

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

The Intersection of Artificial Intelligence and Employment Law

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

The use of algorithmic software and automated decision systems (ADS) to make workforce decisions, including the most sophisticated type, artificial intelligence (AI), has surged in recent years. ...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Texas Federal Court Vacates Gender Identity-Related Sections of the EEOC’s 2024 Harassment Guidance but Other Sections Remain...

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

On May 15, 2025, a federal district court in Texas vacated sections of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC or the “Commission”) 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the “2024 Enforcement...more

Morgan, Brown & Joy, LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Standard for So-Called “Reverse” Discrimination Claims

Morgan, Brown & Joy, LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court held that majority group plaintiffs do not have to meet a higher evidentiary standard than minority group plaintiffs to support their discrimination claims under federal law. In Ames v. Ohio...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Supreme Court – Same Burden of Proof Applies to All Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Claims, Removing Greater Burden for...

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision, overruling the Sixth Circuit’s “background circumstances” rule in employment discrimination cases. The background circumstances rule required members of a...more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

Trump Executive Order Takes Aim at Disparate-Impact Liability

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC on

On April 23, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14281 (EO), “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy,” 90 FR 17537, 2025 WL 1207532. The EO takes aim at disparate-impact liability, which the EO says...more

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

Supreme Court Standardizes Burden for Majority and Minority Plaintiffs Bringing Title VII Claims

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, significantly impacting how employment discrimination claims brought by members of a majority group—such as...more

DLA Piper

United States Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims Under Title VII

DLA Piper on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, vacating and remanding a Sixth Circuit ruling against a heterosexual woman in a Title VII “reverse...more

Ice Miller

Justices' Ruling Lowers Bar For Reverse Discrimination Suits

Ice Miller on

A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services on June 5, concluding that a plaintiff bringing a so-called reverse discrimination claim — where, for example, a majority group...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Executive Agencies Confirm Demise of OFCCP and Identify Private Sector Enforcement Targets

Husch Blackwell LLP on

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Department of Labor released their 2026 Congressional Budget Justifications (CBJ) on May 30, 2025, providing valuable information related to the EEOC’s enforcement...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Missouri Supreme Court Defines "Sex" in MHRA Public Accommodation Case: Potential Implications for Employers

Husch Blackwell LLP on

Last week, the Missouri Supreme Court firmly held that “sex” refers only to “one’s biological classification as male or female” under the provision of the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA) prohibiting discrimination in public...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Title VII Evidentiary Standards in “Reverse Discrimination” Cases, Removing Heightened Standard

Pierce Atwood LLP on

In Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Servs., the U.S. Supreme Court recently settled a circuit split and held that the Sixth Circuit’s “background circumstances” rule, which was applied only to plaintiffs from majority...more

K&L Gates LLP

Supreme Court Invalidates "Background Circumstances" Rule in Title VII Cases

K&L Gates LLP on

On 5 June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that, in order to establish a Title VII claim, a plaintiff who is a member of a “majority group” is not required to show “background...more

6,372 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 255
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