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 February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that challenges the heightened evidentiary burden imposed on majority-group plaintiffs in Title VII...more
On July 17, 2024, the U.S. District for the Northern District of Texas rejected the State of Texas’s request that it vacate recent guidance from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on harassment and...more
A federal appeals court recently held that an employer’s health insurance plan wrongly excluded coverage for gender-affirming care in violation of federal civil rights law – offering a warning to employers across the country...more
Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the dismissal of a sexual orientation discrimination claim brought by a heterosexual woman who was removed from her position and denied a promotion in...more
On Oct. 2, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released proposed enforcement guidance on harassment in the workplace, and the proposed guidance has been receiving quite a bit of attention. This begs the...more
On July 31, 2023, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals revived a Christian teacher’s religious discrimination lawsuit over his refusal to refer to transgender students by their names and pronouns with which they identified. ...more
This week (specifically June 15, 2021) marked the one-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, which outlawed sexual orientation or transgender status employment...more
The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (“OFCCP”) recently issued new FAQ guidance on how federal government contractors should treat non-binary employees (i.e., those who do not exclusively identify as either male...more
Supreme Court decisions are often the most challenging pieces of legal guidance to understand. They are rarely straightforward and usually contain so much analysis that it becomes hard to get to the bottom of what was...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, holding that, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, covered employers may not...more
On Monday, June 15, 2020, the US Supreme Court held in Bostock v. Clayton County that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects transgender, gay and lesbian employees (and prospective employees) from workplace...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition of sex discrimination encompasses discrimination against gay and transgender individuals. Justice Neil...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2019-20 term is receiving substantial attention for cases involving signature initiatives of President Donald Trump’s administration. But the Court also maintains an extensive docket directly relevant...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Stepping into a new year always gives one a chance to reflect on the lessons and trends of the prior year. In that spirit, we are pleased to present our annual selections for the five most intriguing...more
The Supreme Court of the United States kicked off its 2019-2020 term on October 7, 2019, with several noteworthy cases on its docket. This term, some of the issues before the Court will likely have great historical...more
The next session of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is just around the corner. On October 8, 2019, SCOTUS will hear oral argument on three closely watched cases, Bostock v. Clayton Co., Georgia, Altitude...more
Courts around the country are split on the question of whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects individuals against discrimination based on sexual orientation. A recent Arizona federal court recognized the ability...more
The U.S. Supreme Court announced on April 22, 2019 that it will decide whether gay, lesbian, and transgender workers are expressly protected under federal civil rights law on the basis of their sexual orientation. The Court...more
Just this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court finally agreed to hear three cases from the circuit courts that split on whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects against discrimination in the workplace based on...more
Dear Littler: I work in HR at a large, California-based company with branches across the country. We pride ourselves on our diverse and inclusive workforce, and encourage employees to self-identify their race/ethnicity and...more
On February 26, 2018, a majority of the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held, in Zarda v. Altitude Express Inc., that Title VII prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. With...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the first case following the Department of Justice’s pronouncement that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination against transgender persons on the basis of gender identity, a court in the Western...more
In Lampley, et al. v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, the Missouri Court of Appeals held that sex stereotyping can form the basis of a sex discrimination claim when the complaining party is gay, but should not be...more
LGBTQ workplace rights is perhaps the most rapidly evolving area in employment law. On October 4, 2017, United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions formally weighed in on the topic. He issued a memorandum to all federal...more
Just like the leaves turning colors, you can count on a flurry of court filings from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) every September as the agency rushes to get cases on file before the end of its fiscal...more