News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Summary Judgment › Sex Discrimination

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Maynard Nexsen

Supreme Court Brings Clarity to "Reverse Discrimination" Claims

Maynard Nexsen on

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion holding that Title VII does not impose a heightened or different burden of proof for majority-group plaintiffs. Simply put, “reverse discrimination” Title VII claims...more

Jones Day

U.S. Supreme Court Ends Heightened Evidentiary Hurdle for "Majority Group" Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Cases

Jones Day on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services and held that a "majority group" plaintiff in a Title VII case need not satisfy a heightened evidentiary burden to establish a prima-facie...more

McGlinchey Stafford

SCOTUS Ames Decision: Everyone’s in a “Protected Class”

McGlinchey Stafford on

In employment law, we traditionally think of discrimination as applying to minority groups: African Americans, women, homosexuals, or other legally protected groups. In analyzing discrimination claims, one of the first...more

Clark Hill PLC

SCOTUS’s Ames Decision Provides a Roadmap for Title IX Lawsuits Brought by Male Plaintiffs

Clark Hill PLC on

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264 (U.S. June 5, 2025), the Supreme Court held unanimously that the “background circumstances” rule imposed by some lower courts, requiring members of a...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

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

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Reverse Sex Discrimination Case

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On February 26, 2025, the United States Supreme Court entertained oral argument in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that centered on whether a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group must meet a higher...more

Seward & Kissel LLP

Employment Litigation Roundup - May 2024

Seward & Kissel LLP on

May 2024 NJ Supreme Court holds that non-disparagement provisions cannot prohibit disclosure of details relating to claims of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment - The New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously held that...more

Hicks Johnson

Supreme Court Considers Title VII Case That Could Impact Company Diversity Initiatives

Hicks Johnson on

On December 6, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, a Title VII case out of the Eighth Circuit. The petitioner, Sergeant Jatonya Muldrow of the St. Louis Police Department, alleged sex...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: June 2020

Payne & Fears on

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

Holland & Knight LLP

Religious Institutions Update: June 2018 - Lex Est Sanctio Sancta

Holland & Knight LLP on

Since 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court has expressly construed a neutral law of general applicability as consistent with the free exercise clause. Deeming Colorado's public accommodations law just such a law, the Colorado Court...more

Fisher Phillips

Unanimous Supreme Court Scolds Lower Court Over Appellate Deadline Rule - Translation: Sick SCOTUS Burn Over Hyper - Technical...

Fisher Phillips on

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that a federal procedural rule that allows a district court to extend an appeal deadline by no more than 30 days is a non-jurisdictional, mandatory claims processing...more

12 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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide