News & Analysis as of

Discrimination › Title VII › Sex Discrimination

Discrimination is prejudicial treatment related to (or inappropriate consideration of) an individual's actual or perceived membership in a particular class, group or category, such as an individual's... more +
Discrimination is prejudicial treatment related to (or inappropriate consideration of) an individual's actual or perceived membership in a particular class, group or category, such as an individual's race, religion, gender, age, to name a few.  less -
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

DOJ provides guidance on DEI and unlawful discrimination

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

Better late than never. Six months after President Trump ordered the federal government to end “illegal DEI,” the U.S. Department of Justice issued a Memorandum providing guidance on diversity-related practices that it...more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Recent Settlement Latest in Developing Trend in Reverse Discrimination Cases

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP on

It was announced on July 7 that IBM had resolved a former consultant’s ​“reverse” discrimination claim for an undisclosed sum, closing the door on his Title VII race and sex discrimination lawsuit. This settlement is yet...more

K&L Gates LLP

Supreme Court Invalidates "Background Circumstances" Rule in Title VII Cases

K&L Gates LLP on

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

Cozen O'Connor

Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services

Cozen O'Connor on

In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States announced that Title VII’s protections against discrimination do not require majority group individuals (including white people, men, and heterosexuals) to...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

BREAKING: SCOTUS overrules higher standard for majority group asserting bias claims

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

On June 5th the U.S. Supreme Court held that majority-group plaintiffs do not have to show special “background circumstances” to support a Title VII discrimination claim. ...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

EEOC and DOJ Issue Joint Press Release and Technical Assistance Documents on “Unlawful DEI-Related Discrimination”

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

On March 19, 2025, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) issued a joint press release announcing the release of two technical assistance documents designed to...more

Offit Kurman

EEOC Investigates 20 Private Law Firms Questioning Their DEI-Related Employment Practices

Offit Kurman on

On March 17, EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas sent letters to 20 large law firms requesting information about their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) related employment practices. The letters express the EEOC’s suspicions...more

Benesch

Supreme Court Appears Poised to Do Away With Additional Burdens on Reverse-Discrimination Plaintiffs

Benesch on

On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. OH Dept. of Youth Services, which questioned whether the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals correctly decided that a heterosexual plaintiff should have...more

K&L Gates LLP

EEOC Acting Chair Issues Statement Announcing Commission's Plans to Remove Gender Ideology and Return to Mission of "Protecting...

K&L Gates LLP on

On 28 January 2025, the Acting Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission), Andrea Lucas (Acting Chair Lucas) issued a statement announcing that the Commission is returning to its “mission of...more

Littler

EEOC Acting Chair Issues Statement on Gender Identity, Removes Guidance on Transgender Issues

Littler on

On January 28, 2025, Andrea Lucas (R), the acting chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, issued a statement outlining her views on gender identity in the workplace, and listing a series of actions she has taken...more

Akerman LLP - HR Defense

U.S. Supreme Court to Review Reverse Discrimination Standard

Akerman LLP - HR Defense on

Should an employee’s burden to plead and prove workplace discrimination differ depending upon whether they are considered in a “majority” or “minority” group? The U.S. Supreme Court is now set to decide whether an arguably...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Title VII Employment Claims

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employees alleging employment discrimination to show they suffered an adverse employment action as a result of their membership in a protected class....more

FordHarrison

It’s about Tyne to Try Something New: The Burden of the Standard of Proof

FordHarrison on

Executive Summary - In January, the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision that likely will impact employers’ litigation strategies in discrimination cases. In Tynes v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, the court...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

Employers Beware: Title VII Now Allows Employees to More Easily Challenge Your Decision to Transfer or Reassign Them

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

No More Adjectives… Just Some Harm: Supreme Rules on Title VII Job Transfer Threshold

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

If you transfer an employee to a job with no loss in pay or title but the employee thinks it is less desirable, can that employee sue you for discrimination under Title VII? While it depends on the facts, in Muldrow v. St....more

Ballard Spahr LLP

SCOTUS Lowered the Threshold of Harm Required for Title VII Discrimination Claims

Ballard Spahr LLP on

Last week, on April 17, 2024, the US Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., that an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)...more

Saul Ewing LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split Concerning Title VII Actions Related to Workplace Transfers

Saul Ewing LLP on

On April 17, 2024 the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split over the standard to apply to Title VII discrimination cases challenging job transfers, ruling that discriminatory workplace transfers are prohibited even if...more

Perkins Coie

Muldrow Sets a New Standard for Workplace Discrimination

Perkins Coie on

On April 17, 2024, in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employer may violate Title VII’s anti-discrimination provisions when it transfers an employee even if the transfer did...more

Butler Snow LLP

Muldrow v. City of St. Louis: The Supreme Court Opens the Door for Discriminatory Job Transfer Claims

Butler Snow LLP on

On Wednesday, April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court provided an opening for workers to allege employment discrimination claims regarding job transfers based on sex, race, religion, or national origin. In Muldrow v....more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

SCOTUS Relaxes Standards for Title VII Plaintiffs in Workplace Discrimination Claims

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, No. 22-193, 2024 WL 1642826 (U.S. Apr. 17, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an employee alleging that an involuntary lateral job transfer constituted workplace discrimination in...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies When Job Transfers Can Serve as a Basis for Title VII Claims

Foley Hoag LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis that rejected a heightened injury standard for Title VII claims based on job transfers and held that employees alleging discrimination...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Supreme Court Rules Discriminatory Job Transfers Need Not Produce “Significant” Harm to be Actionable Under Title VII

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court ruled on the standard under which a plaintiff can proceed with a claim for a discriminatory job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”),...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Groff v. DeJoy and Its Impact on Religious Accommodation

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from discriminating against employees and applicants on the basis of religion (as well as race, color, sex, and national origin), and it...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

A Different Type of Transfer Portal? Supreme Court Looking at Employment Transfer Discrimination Case

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

If you transfer employees with no loss of pay or status, can they sue you under Title VII? Right now, it depends on where you live and what your local federal circuit has ruled. That could change....more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Back to the Text: Fifth Circuit Broadens Potential Discrimination Claims under Title VII

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

Addressing what it deemed an “interpretive incongruity,” on August 18, 2023, the Fifth Circuit shifted nearly 30 years of Title VII disparate treatment precedent in Hamilton et al. v. Dallas County. Prior to Hamilton, Fifth...more

145 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 6
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide