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
Jorge Hernandez-Toraño Talks About the Importance of Moving the Needle Forward for Hispanics
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
On June 2, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the appeal of a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision interpreting the limitations period for filing lawsuits under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. ...more
In a dispute over workplace vaccination requirements, a federal district court in Oregon joined a growing trend in workplace vaccination litigation when it ruled that a plaintiff’s allegations of religious conflict with...more
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia denied Liberty University’s motion to dismiss a federal lawsuit brought by a former employee who alleges that Liberty violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more
In a recent development in Mobley vs. Workday, Inc., the United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied in part Workday, Inc.’s (“Workday”) Motion to Dismiss, allowing the Plaintiff to pursue...more
Diversity efforts are not synonymous with discrimination. A first-year law student at New York University, identified as Plaintiff John Doe, sued the institution in October 2023, challenging the selection process for...more
On March 28, 2024, four former Walden University students (“Plaintiffs”) filed a proposed settlement both individually and on behalf of a putative class of current and former Walden University (“Walden”) students with the...more
Colavecchia v. South Side Area Sch. Dist., No. 2:22-CV-01804-CCW, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70461 (W.D. Pa. April 21, 2023). The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denied South Side Area School...more
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
In an order filed on June 27, 2023, the Arizona District Court determined that a wireless provider co-owned by the Navajo Nation was not immune from suit in federal court. In Tsosie v. N.T.U.A. Wireless LLC, et al.,...more
A Michigan federal district court denied a franchisor’s motion to dismiss claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Michigan law, and claims alleging retaliatory termination and sexually hostile work...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In EEOC v. Konos, Inc., Case No. 1:20-CV-973 (W.D. Mich. June 3, 2021), the EEOC filed a lawsuit on behalf of a claimant against her employer, alleging it subjected to her to a hostile work environment and...more
Recently, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit, in Thompson v. Cenac Towing Co., L.L.C., analyzed a trial court’s grant of summary judgment in a company’s favor after a noose-like rope was found hanging in a maritime...more
On April 12, 2021, the New Jersey District Court for the District of New Jersey in Spence v. New Jersey, et al., granted in part and denied in part a motion to dismiss an employee’s sexual harassment and retaliation claims...more
The Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA) prohibits discrimination in employment based on sex. The state law defines “sex discrimination” to include “discrimination because of or on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth,...more
Here is what we cover in this issue of The Employment Law Reporter: •The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of an employment discrimination lawsuit. •A mediation agreement that...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On December 23, 2019, District Judge Rosemary Marquez ruled, in connection with a motion to dismiss, that Title VII does protect discrimination based on a person’s transgender status, and that a health...more
Ever since the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Smith v. City of Jackson, plaintiff employment lawyers have struggled with how best to assert a viable claim of disparate impact age discrimination. The concept of disparate...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Toomey v. U of Arizona, No. 19-35 (D. Ar. June 24, 2019), the Magistrate Judge determined on a motion to dismiss that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on a person’s transgender status. ...more
Employment law is full of burden-shifting, prima facie standards and evidentiary hurdles. Sometimes, even the courts apply the wrong standard at the wrong stage of a case. That appears to be what happened in the case of...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In an EEOC-initiated systemic lawsuit alleging that a senior living and nursing facility operator violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”) by failing to offer employees light duty as a...more
A federal district court in Maryland recently denied in part an employer’s motion to dismiss a race discrimination action brought on behalf of African-born security guards by the EEOC, and instead granted the EEOC’s motion to...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: A recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, part of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, reaffirmed a growing circuit split regarding whether Title VII of the Civil Rights...more
Q. An employee has requested that the company give her an accommodation due to a religious practice I have never heard of. Do we have to comply with this request? A. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: An Alabama district court granted a temporary staffing company’s motion to dismiss all claims in one of the EEOC’s most high-profile lawsuits asserting hiring discrimination and abuse of vulnerable workers....more