#WorkforceWednesday®: EEOC/DOJ Joint DEI Guidance, EEOC Letters to Law Firms, OFCCP Retroactive DEI Enforcement - Employment Law This Week®
False Claims Act Insights - Can DE&I Initiatives Lead to Potential False Claims Act Liability?
How to Comply with Trump’s Executive Order, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity
2025 Outlook: The Department of Health and Human Services Under the Second Trump Administration – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday®: How Will Trump’s Federal Changes Impact Employers? - Employment Law This Week®
DE Talk | If It’s Not in Writing, It Never Happened: Applicant Tracking & Recordkeeping Strategies to Ensure OFCCP Compliance
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 28: Construction Compliance with Joan Moore and Mim Munzel of The Arbor Consulting Group
Webinar: Is Your DEI Policy Setting You Up for a Lawsuit?
#WorkforceWednesday: NLRB Wants Shuttered Starbucks Stores Reopened, Big Tech Retreats from DEI Programs, and Employers Scrap College Requirements - Employment Law This Week®
The Informed Board Podcast | How Will Corporate DEI Policies Be Affected by the Supreme Court Ruling in the University Affirmative Action Cases?
#WorkforceWednesday: The Ripple Effect of the Supreme Court’s SFFA Ruling for Diversity in the Workplace - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VII-134-Panel Discussion on Supreme Court's Affirmative Action Ruling and the Impact on Employer DEI Programs
DE Under 3: How to Lawfully Engage in Race-Based Employment Decisions
The Labor Law Insider: Recent U.S. Supreme Court, NLRB Decisions Highlight Labor Issues in Higher Education
Business Better Podcast Episode: Is DEI at Risk? Considerations on the US Supreme Court Ruling Against Affirmative Action Programs
DE Under 3: 4 Implications Impacting Federal Contractors & Employers Following the SCOTUS Decision in the Harvard & UNC Cases
DE Under 3: SCOTUS Finds “Race-Based” Admissions Practices At Harvard and UNC Unlawful
DE Under 3: The Harvard and UNC Case Decisions Are Coming
DE Talk | Top 5 Actions to Take After You Complete Your Affirmative Action Plan
There have been recent developments in the continually evolving legal landscape for employers utilizing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and policies. Below is a brief overview of those recent developments and...more
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
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
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
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
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
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
Can members of a majority group be subject to a heightened pleading standard for their Title VII discrimination claims? The United States Supreme Court answered this question with a unanimous “no” in Ames v. Ohio Department...more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are not...more
The Supreme Court has voted unanimously to end a Circuit Court split regarding whether members of a “majority group” have additional evidentiary burdens when bringing a case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for...more
Key Takeaways: - The Supreme Court held that Title VII does not permit courts to impose a heightened evidentiary standard on majority-group plaintiffs alleging disparate treatment. - Some lower courts have required...more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated ruling in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, concluding that courts cannot require members of a majority group to satisfy a heightened evidentiary...more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States resolved the split among federal circuits and held that the same standard used to evaluate claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to all...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs bringing discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) cannot be required to satisfy a heightened evidentiary...more
DECISION ALERT: AMES V. OHIO DEP’T OF YOUTH SVCS. INTRODUCTION: On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that so-called “reverse discrimination” claims—discrimination claims...more
As widely expected, the Supreme Court’s June 5, 2025 decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services confirmed that a plaintiff alleging employment discrimination under Title VII cannot be held to a different,...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the “background circumstances” requirement multiple circuit courts of appeals have applied to Title...more
Just today, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a contentious disagreement between courts regarding the burden of proof required to bring a disparate treatment claim under Title VII. While the majority of appeals courts in the...more
On March 19, Andrea Lucas (Republican appointee), Acting Chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, released a document titled, “What You Should Know About DEI-Related Discrimination at Work,” offering...more
On the heels of President Trumps Executive Orders signaling the administration’s intent to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs in the federal and private sector, the EEOC has issued two technical...more
On March 19, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued two non-binding guidance documents on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices in the workplace....more
On March 19, 2025, the EEOC issued two technical assistance documents addressing “DEI-related discrimination” in the workplace. The first document, issued jointly with the Department of Justice, is a one-pager titled “What To...more
Just as employers are reconsidering their approach to DEI and the myriad of potential risks such policies could present under current administration enforcement priorities, the Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case...more
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has set its sights on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, signaling heightened enforcement risks for employers. In a memorandum, Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the DOJ to...more
Since re-taking the White House 11 days ago, President Donald J. Trump has taken dramatic steps to dismantle DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) programs in workplaces nationwide. President Trump’s executive orders...more