The Implications of President Trump's EO on Gender Ideology: What's the Tea in L&E?
Unveiling Gender-Affirming Care: Why It Matters and What’s at Stake – Diagnosing Health Care
DE Under 3: New Controversial Proposed Rule Affecting Title VII
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC's LGBTQ+ Guidance Blocked, Employer COVID-19 Update, NYC Prepares for Pay Transparency Law - Employment Law This Week®
DE Under 3: Data Gathering & Data Delivery
DE Under 3: New Data Collection Burdens, NLRB’s Ruling Regarding Union Election Dismissals, and OMB’s Tech Modernization Fund
DE Under 3: DEAMcon22, Remarks from OFCCP Director Yang & EEOC Commissioner Sonderling & Vaccine Mandate Updates
DE Under 3: EEO-1 Survey Closure Date, Non-Binary Reporting Updates, and Government Agency Equity Plans
Helping the Transgender Community Through The Name Change Project with Samantha Rothaus of Davis+Gilbert: On Record PR
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Biden Administration Quick Take – Three Employment Law Initiatives We’re Monitoring
The Year Ahead: Litigation Hot Spots at a Glance
Labor & Employment Law: Vermont and Federal Legislative Update
Illegal or ill-mannered? Title VII meets Ms. Manners
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Decision on LGBTQ Employees, EEOC on Older Workers Returning to Work - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law This Week®: NJ Limits NDAs, DOL’s Proposed Overtime Rule, Pay Data Collection, Sexual Harassment Training
[WEBINAR] Labor & Employment Law: What Changed in 2017
Episode 25: EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum Part II: Other Emerging EEOC Trends + Takeaways
Part 1 of 2: My Sit-Down Interview With Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Employment Law This Week: Joint-Employer Guidance Rescinded, NYC’s “Fair Workweek” Bills, ADA and Gender Dysphoria, Philadelphia’s Salary History Law
On May 15, 2025, a federal district court in Texas vacated sections of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC or the “Commission”) 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the “2024 Enforcement...more
A federal court’s ruling last week striking down the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s guidelines on gender identity and sexual orientation harassment in the workplace got the attention of employers around the...more
On May 15, 2025, a District Court struck portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) 2024 guidance pertaining to sexual orientation and gender identity under Title VII....more
On May 15, a Texas federal court vacated portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace, concluding that the agency’s expanded interpretation of “sex”...more
Don't expect the EEOC to appeal. In April 2024, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace. The Enforcement Guidance addressed, among other things, harassment...more
On May 15, 2025, a federal court vacated portions of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) workplace harassment guidance, specifically, guidance on harassment based on sexual orientation and gender...more
On Monday, January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order entitled “Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth To The Federal Government” (the “Order”). The Order...more
If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more
On April 29, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the “Guidance”). The Guidance sets forth the EEOC’s position on harassment that constitutes...more
On April 29, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), after nearly seven years of effort, released updated guidance concerning harassment in the workplace. The updated guidance reflects three key developments...more
The Illinois Appellate Court (Second District) recently issued an opinion deciding an issue of first impression here in Illinois: whether an employer violates the Illinois Human Rights Act (Act) by denying a transgender woman...more
You may recall our blog post last summer recapping the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia that held discrimination based on sexual orientation is prohibited by Title VII. After that decision,...more
That this past year was the most challenging year in your professional life is an almost certainty. You were forced to learn entirely new statutory schemes, absorb new local health directives on a near-daily basis, create a...more
It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes for the past few years—and this past month...more
Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) - Summary: Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity....more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued the following opinions: Bostock v. Clayton County, No. 17-1618; Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, No. 17-1623; R. G. & G. R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. Equal...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that LGTBQ+ employees are protected from workplace discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court issued its decision in three consolidated cases: Bostock v....more
In a historic 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employer who discriminates against an employee merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII. 590 U. S. ____ (2020). This landmark...more
In an historic decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that sexual orientation and gender identity/expression discrimination are prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Bostock v. Clayton County,...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that federal law protects gay, lesbian, and transgender people from discrimination in employment. The case, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, involved Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more
In a 6-3 decision written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity is a form of “sex” discrimination prohibited by Title VII. Justice...more
On June 15, 2020 the United States Supreme Court handed down a momentous decision ruling that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) protects gay and transgender employees from workplace discrimination. The...more
In a landmark decision for LGBTQ+ rights in the United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 15, 2020, that federal law prohibits employers from discriminating against employees for being gay or transgender....more
Today, in Bostock v. Clayton County, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and transgender status in the...more
Today, the United States Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated ruling as to whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The...more