News & Analysis as of

Employees Sex Discrimination Sexual Orientation Discrimination

Quarles & Brady LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Standard for Reverse Discrimination Suits Under Title VII

Quarles & Brady LLP on

In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Supreme Court last Thursday held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) imposes no additional requirements on majority-group...more

Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

SCOTUS Unanimously Rejects Heightened Burden for Majority-Group Discrimination Claims

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

Bracewell LLP

Employees in the “Majority” Do Not Have Higher Burden When Proving Discrimination Says Unanimous Supreme Court

Bracewell LLP on

In a case filed by a heterosexual woman claiming she was discriminated against due to her sexual orientation, a unanimous United States Supreme Court held that she should not be required to meet a higher standard to prove...more

Payne & Fears

SCOTUS Eases the Standard for Reverse Discrimination Claims Under Title VII

Payne & Fears on

Today, in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the Supreme Court unanimously held that in order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group does not...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Prima Facie “Background Circumstances” Test for Majority Group Plaintiffs

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court vacated the dismissal of a heterosexual woman’s Title VII claims, concluding that she was improperly subjected to a heightened prima facie standard that required her to show...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

The emerging law on women’s advancement programs and transgender rights: a cross-border perspective

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The landscape of transgender employment laws is evolving globally, with various jurisdictions adopting laws that ensure inclusivity and non-discrimination in the workplace. This area is one of the most complex issues in...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Enjoined Before Effective: Revised Title IX Regulations Blocked in 15 States And Counting

Quarles & Brady LLP on

As previously reported, the U.S. Department of Education published its highly-anticipated revised Title IX regulations on April 29, 2024. These regulations move away from the rigid procedural requirements mandated by the...more

Perkins Coie

June Tip of the Month: Updated EEOC Guidance Enhances Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Protections

Perkins Coie on

On April 29, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its new Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the Guidance), the first update to its Guidance in over 20 years. Among the many...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

DHHS Bolsters Non-Discrimination Protections for Recipients of Covered Health Care Services and Activities

In a Final Rule issued on May 6, 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“DHHS”) finalized regulations implementing Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (“Section 1557”). The Final Rule updates and...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

The Revised Title IX Regulations are Finally Here: What Has Changed and What to Do Next

Quarles & Brady LLP on

On April 19, 2024, the U.S. Department of Education released the unofficial version of the final revisions to the Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) regulations, several months ahead of the late summer...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Department of Education Issues Amendments to Title IX Regulations

Ballard Spahr LLP on

As long expected, the U.S. Department of Education issued amendments to Title IX regulations following the public comment period. The amended regulations—totaling 1,577 pages—make clear that sex discrimination under Title IX...more

Foster Swift Collins & Smith

Michigan Senate Passes Significant Amendments to Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act

On March 1, 2023, the Michigan Senate approved a series of amendments to the state’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, which would add “sexual orientation, gender identity or expression” to the law’s list of prohibited...more

Freeman Law

The Righteous Stand Bold Like a Lion | Bostock, Religious Organization Employers, and Title VII

Freeman Law on

This Insights blog addresses the aftermath of the monumental U.S. Supreme Court opinion of Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S.Ct. 1731 (June 15, 2020) and the ongoing collision of the right to religious freedom enjoyed by...more

Adler Pollock & Sheehan P.C.

Developments in the Law on Protections for LGBTQ+ Employees

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County,140 S. Ct. 1731, 1754 (2020) that expanded the prohibition against sex discrimination under Title VII (“Title VII”) of the Civil Rights Act to include discrimination on...more

Baker Donelson

First Texas Court of Appeals to Follow Bostock Ruling

Baker Donelson on

Nine months after the United States Supreme Court's historic decision in Bostock, the Texas Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had to decide whether the interpretation of Title VII's language in protecting LGBTQ employees also...more

Zelle  LLP

That is SO last week - July 2015 #3

Zelle LLP on

There’s just no rest for employment lawyers this summer. We had another exciting week. The biggest news was the EEOC’s ruling that Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The agency found that...more

16 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide