News & Analysis as of

Sex Discrimination Employer Liability Issues

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

What Employers Need to Know After Supreme Court’s Reverse Discrimination Decision

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 145 S. Ct. 1540 (2025), making clear that an employee-plaintiff who is a member of a majority group cannot be held...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Doing Nothing in Response to a Report of Sexual Harassment Could Cost You Millions – the LAPD Recently Learned the Hard Way

If an employee complains about a sexually suggestive picture circulating in the workplace that looks like her but is not, is that a hostile work environment complaint? It might be. In Lillian Carranza v. City of Los Angeles,...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Proselytizing Online, Fired in Real Life: Are Anti-LGBTQ+ Views Protected by Title VII?

Husch Blackwell LLP on

Earlier this month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement, commenced litigation against Rock Snowpark on July 2, 2025, for allegedly retaliating...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Yes, Menstrual Cramps May Qualify as a Disability Under ADA

If a qualified job candidate asks to reschedule a second-round interview due to severe menstrual cramps associated with endometriosis, is that a request for an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act? If you...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Reverse Discrimination Lawsuits Are So Back

Ballard Spahr LLP on

On June 5, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court eliminated the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard for majority plaintiffs (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) who claim discrimination under Title VII (also known as reverse...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Pay Equity Studies in Focus: Navigating Privilege and Public Disclosure Risks

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

A recent decision from the U.S. District Court in Kansas—Spears v. Thermo Fisher Scientific—ruled that a pay equity analysis conducted primarily for business purposes was not protected by attorney-client privilege or the work...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Missouri Supreme Court Defines "Sex" in MHRA Public Accommodation Case: Potential Implications for Employers

Husch Blackwell LLP on

Last week, the Missouri Supreme Court firmly held that “sex” refers only to “one’s biological classification as male or female” under the provision of the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA) prohibiting discrimination in public...more

Venable LLP

Pay Equity Pitfalls: Varying Standards for "Equal Work" and Valid Comparators in Pay Equity Litigation

Venable LLP on

The Equal Pay Act of 1963 (the EPA) and related state laws require employers to pay men and women equally for equal work. ...more

Brooks Pierce

High Court Unanimously Rejects the Imposition of Special Requirements for “Majority Group” Discrimination Claims

Brooks Pierce on

On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the notion that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) imposes special requirements on a “majority-group” plaintiff trying to make an initial...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

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

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

In the Zone: Third Circuit Expands Title IX’s “Zone of Interests”

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held in Oldham v. Pennsylvania State Univ., No. 22-2056 (3d Cir. May 29, 2025) that Title IX may allow for claims by non-students and non-employees. In the...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

Woods Rogers

Supreme Court Reaffirms Equal Access to Title VII Protections

Woods Rogers on

In a unanimous decision issued June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services vacated a Sixth Circuit ruling that imposed a higher evidentiary burden on majority-group plaintiffs in Title...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

Steady, Ames, Fire! Supreme Court Hits its Mark in Historic ‘Reverse Discrimination’ Ruling

The closely watched battle over “reverse discrimination” claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 concluded Wednesday with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The...more

Clark Hill PLC

In the Zone: Third Circuit Clarifies Reach of Title IX

Clark Hill PLC on

On May 29, 2025, in Oldham v. Pa. State University, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that the “zone of interest” test applies to Title IX claims. See No. 22-2056, 2025 WL 1524452 (3d Cir. 2025). The plaintiff, Jennifer...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Ames ‘Reverse Discrimination’ Case

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services in which the Plaintiff alleged reverse discrimination based on sexual orientation. Marlean Ames was hired in 2004 as an...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Heightened Standard for "Reverse Discrimination" Claims

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On June 5, 2025, in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the “background circumstances” test previously applied by several federal circuits in “reverse discrimination” cases....more

Fox Rothschild LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Standard of Proof in So-Called 'Reverse Discrimination' Cases

Fox Rothschild LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court set the record straight on June 5, 2025 — reminding employers that all employees are created equal when it comes to Title VII litigation in federal court. The decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of...more

Hogan Lovells

Employment in the news | May 2025

Hogan Lovells on

In a busy month in the courts and tribunals, an employer was liable for psychiatric injury caused by a flawed disciplinary process. The High Court found that TUPE didn’t transfer an employer’s vicarious liability for an...more

A&O Shearman

EHRC commences consultation on impact of UK Supreme Court ruling on biological sex

A&O Shearman on

This week, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) commenced consultation on updates to its Code of Practice in light of the UK Supreme Court’s ruling that the terms “woman”, “man” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

EEOC Opens 2024 EEO-1 Filing Portal: Employers Urged to Begin Preparation

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Yesterday, the EEOC opened the Online Filing System (OFS) for the 2024 EEO-1 Component 1 data collection process. Covered employers have until June 24, 2025 to complete their submission....more

TNG Consulting

Should Schools and Colleges Remove Gender Identity Protections from Policy?

TNG Consulting on

Like many firms with a leadership think tank, our consultants collaborate to inform how we advise our clients and ATIXA’s members. Recently, we discussed the Trump Administration’s Executive Order (EO) that limits its...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Litigate or Arbitrate? Sixth Circuit Decision Looks at Timing of Sexual Harassment Claim

Can you compel arbitration with an employee who is alleging sexual harassment? You may recall that in 2022, Congress enacted the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA), which precludes...more

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP

What Is Illegal DEI? Employers and Workers Are Still Looking for Answers

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP on

Five years ago, companies were eager to adopt diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. Now, the pendulum has swung in the other direction. DEI programs are under attack, and employers are trying to figure out what...more

956 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 39

"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