Disparate Impact & Enforcement Rollbacks: What’s the Tea in L&E?
Enforcement Priorities of the Second Trump Administration: The False Claims Act
#WorkforceWednesday®: New DOL Leadership, NLRB Quorum, EEOC Enforcement Priorities - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: How Will Trump’s Federal Changes Impact Employers? - Employment Law This Week®
Building Bridges – Rev. Al Sharpton’s Blueprint for Harlem’s Museum of Civil Rights
#WorkforceWednesday® - Key SCOTUS Decisions This Term for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
Webinar: Is Your DEI Policy Setting You Up for a Lawsuit?
DE Under 3: Title VII Prohibits Discriminatory Job Transfers Even Without Significant Harm, U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled
DE Under 3: EEOC Consent Decree Illustrated Enforcement Stance Regarding Natural Hair Texture & Race Discrimination
The Burr Broadcast: EEOC Strategic Enforcement Plan
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC Enforcement Plan, California Expands Paid Sick Leave, and Strikes Across the Country - Employment Law This Week®
DE Under 3: U.S. EEOC Announced Year-End Litigation Round-Up for Fiscal Year 2023
#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: Title VII Actionable Adverse Employment Actions Not Limited to Only “Ultimate” Employment Decisions
Supreme Court Miniseries: Religious Accommodation at Work
Employment Law Now VII-133 - Hot Summer Employment Law Developments
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Introduces Heightened Standard for Religious Accommodation, Rules Against Affirmative Action, Protects “Expressive” Services - Employment Law This Week®
Business Better Podcast Episode: Is DEI at Risk? Considerations on the US Supreme Court Ruling Against Affirmative Action Programs
DE Under 3: New Controversial Proposed Rule Affecting Title VII
Do former employees have the right to sue their previous employer under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination in the administration of post-employment fringe benefits? Resolving a circuit...more
Must a student with a disability prove that their school acted in “bad faith” to win a discrimination case? Until now, courts in some parts of the country said yes, requiring disabled students to meet a higher standard than...more
On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a writ of certiorari as improvidently granted, leaving unresolved a significant question regarding class-action certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The question...more
The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari on January 17, 2025, in A.J.T. by and through A.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 279, 96 F.4th 1058 (8th Cir. 2024), cert. granted sub nom. A.J.T. v....more
In an important opinion for employers defending against misclassification claims, the Supreme Court has issued its first major employment law decision of the current term in EMD Sales v. Carrera, with two other marquee...more
On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, No. 24-304, to decide “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil...more
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Jan. 13, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford (No. 23-997), which addresses whether former employees have a right to sue their former employer under the Americans with...more
The Supreme Court of the United States recently heard oral arguments in a case that could broadly impact employers’ retiree benefits and liability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The court will decide whether...more
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
Mattioda v. Nelson, 98 F.4th 1164 (9th Cir. 2024) - Summary: Disability-based harassment claims are available under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act....more
Generally, employers cannot discriminate against employees because of the employee’s disability. There are several laws that protect against disability-based discrimination, including: the Americans with Disabilities Act...more
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
The Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in Groff v. DeJoy (opinion here) on June 29, 2023, holding that Title VII requires an employer denying a religious accommodation to show that granting the...more
The Supreme Court recently ruled that the burden an employer must meet in denying a requested religious accommodation is “substantial” and not merely “de minimis.” Employers will now have a harder time denying religious...more
On June 29, 2023, in a unanimous decision in Groff v. DeJoy, Postmaster General, the Supreme Court of the United States clarified Title VII’s “undue hardship” standard for employers denying religious accommodations. The Court...more
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Groff v. DeJoy, 600 U.S. __ (2023), clarifying the standard governing an employer’s duty to accommodate its employees’ religious observances and...more
At the Supreme Court - Recovery of Damages for Property Destroyed During a Strike. On January 10, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Glacier Northwest v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters. At issue is...more
Last month, in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., the Supreme Court denied a petitioner’s right to emotional distress damages in a private action brought under federal anti-discrimination laws. The Petitioner, a...more
Executive Summary: In a groundbreaking opinion authored by Chief Justice Roberts in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., the United States Supreme Court held that damages for emotional distress are not recoverable in a...more
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that emotional distress damages are not available in private actions pursuant to various anti-discrimination statutes authorized under the Spending Clause of the United States...more
This month's key California employment law cases involve EEOC charges, disability discrimination, and meal breaks....more