Abortion Protections Struck Down, LGBTQ Harassment Guidance Vacated, EEO-1 Reporting Opens - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Podcast - Ruling: Las mujeres toman cerveza a los 18 años
DE Under 3: EEOC & DOJ Technical Guidance for Employer’s AI Use; Upcoming EEOC Hearing; Event for Mental Health in the Workplace
Episode 24: Corporate Oppression Doctrine Meets Sex Discrimination: A Conversation with Professor Meredith Miller
College Esports Programs: What You Need To Know
Framing the American Past to Better Understand Women and Gender History with UC Davis Professors Ellen Hartigan -O’Conner and Lisa Materson: On Record PR
Election 2020: The Future of Pay Equity
#WorkforceWednesday: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Leaves Behind a Legacy - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Decision on LGBTQ Employees, EEOC on Older Workers Returning to Work - Employment Law This Week®
This Week in FCPA-Episode 142 - the What’s in Your Supply Chain? edition
Investigating Harassment Claims
Episode 25: EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum Part II: Other Emerging EEOC Trends + Takeaways
Episode 24: EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum Part I: Employers' "Superstar Harassment" Problem
I-12: Update on the DOL's New OT Rules, and Part 2 of My Interview with Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Part 1 of 2: My Sit-Down Interview With Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Stealth Lawyer: Clare Dalton, Acupuncturist
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that courts may not impose a heightened evidentiary standard on majority-group plaintiffs alleging...more
On June 5, the Supreme Court decided Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding unanimously that members of majority groups suing their employers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) are not...more
On June 22, 2021, the United States Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (“OCR”) and the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (“DOJ) issued a joint Fact Sheet addressed to elementary and secondary...more
This fall, the U.S. Supreme Court heard three employment cases that collectively ask: Does Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination “because of…sex,” encompass discrimination based...more
On April 22, 2019, the Supreme Court announced that it would take up three cases that address the scope of “sex discrimination” under Title VII. Supreme Court review seemed inevitable given the growing divide regarding how...more
With its en banc decision on February 26, 2018 in Melissa Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., No. 15-3775 (2d Cir. Feb. 26, 2018), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals became the second federal appeals court to hold that sexual...more
Although the Supreme Court has not taken up the issue and the status of sexual orientation discrimination remains uncertain, another Circuit Court of Appeals has now affirmatively ruled on the issue. In a 10-3 en banc...more
On Monday February 26, 2018, for the second time in less than a year, a federal appeals court ruled that Title VII forbids sexual orientation discrimination because it is a form of sex discrimination. This time, in Zarda v....more
A second federal appellate court has ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on their sexual orientation. The ruling is in line with the EEOC’s...more
On Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (which covers Connecticut, New York, and Vermont), became the second federal appellate court to explicitly hold that federal law prohibits employment discrimination...more
On February 26, 2018, in a landmark decision continuing the expansion of Title VII’s protection, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals became the second federal appeals court to hold that Title VII prohibits discrimination on...more
The 10-3 en banc decision in Zarda v. Altitude Express issued earlier this week by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is likely to be relied on by regulators and private plaintiffs alleging violations of the...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
On October 4, 2017, the United States Department of Justice, through Attorney General Jeff Sessions, issued a memorandum rescinding an Obama-era policy protecting transgender employees from employment discrimination pursuant...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On October 5, 2017, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued an agency memorandum stating that the language contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “does not prohibit discrimination based...more
On October 5, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed the Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) stance that gender identity is protected as part of the prohibition against “sex” discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Department of Justice has reversed the previous Administration’s position on employment protections for transgender individuals, and issued a memorandum that will likely be relied on by private...more
Still confused as to where the Trump administration stands on whether Title VII prohibits discrimination based on gender identity? Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ recent announcement should clarify that for you. So what’s an...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
Whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status and/or gender expression remains a heated debate in the courts and between...more
On October 4, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed the Department of Justice’s position that gender identity is protected as part of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against sex discrimination — taking...more
Recently, much has been made about the government’s conflicting positions regarding whether sexual orientation is protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC (“Equal Employment Opportunity Commission”)...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The first eight months of the new administration signals a retrenchment on the executive branch’s view of legal protections due LGBT individuals, including in employment....more
Last week, I had a short post about the position taken by the U.S. Department of Justice in the Zarda v. Altitude Express “gay skydiver” case. The DOJ has directly opposed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which...more
Last week, on Wednesday July 26, 2017, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) filed an amicus brief in a Second Circuit case taking the position that Title VII does not protect employees against sexual orientation...more