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
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
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
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
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected use of a special legal test for plaintiffs to prove illegal bias in reverse discrimination cases. ...more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court settled a longtime debate among federal appellate courts regarding so-called “reverse discrimination” claims that are brought by employees under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964...more
On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous ruling authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the U.S. Supreme Court revived the employment discrimination claims of an Ohio woman who contends that she was the victim of “reverse...more
Earlier this month, in a long-awaited ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a straight white woman who claimed to have lost out on two positions to LGBT candidates and was also demoted in favor of them. ...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of an employee claiming that she was a victim of reverse discrimination after she was allegedly denied a promotion because she is heterosexual. In the underlying case, the...more
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 605 U.S. ___ (2025). The case addressed whether plaintiffs from majority groups must meet a higher evidentiary...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of petitioner, Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, who commenced a reverse discrimination case against her former employer, the Ohio Department of Youth...more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously held that a Plaintiff alleging reverse discrimination under Title VII be held to the same standard as if they belonged to another suspect class. Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth...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
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously agreed that reverse discrimination plaintiffs are not required to produce additional evidence at the outset of their case to proceed with their claims. Ames v. Ohio...more