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
The Year Ahead: Litigation Hot Spots at a Glance
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®
Global Employment Policies - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
II-25 – Top 10 New Year’s Resolutions for Employers in 2018
Episode 25: EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum Part II: Other Emerging EEOC Trends + Takeaways
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Employment Law This Week®: Class Action Waiver Cases, Rescission of Tip-Pooling Restrictions, Title VII & Sexual Orientation, Updated Form I-9
Part 1 of 2: My Sit-Down Interview With Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
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
In its 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits covered employers from discriminating against employees based on their...more
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
On June 17, 2024, a United States District Court judge in Kentucky issued a preliminary injunction preventing the 2024 Title IX regulations from going into effect in several states, including Ohio. The 2024 regulations are...more
Employers should review their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and anti-discrimination policies as federal and state laws protecting transgender workers continue to take shape. Earlier this month, the Equal Employment...more
As employers strive to create inclusive and compliant workplaces, you should note that using an employee’s requested pronouns not only conveys respect but also helps you stay in compliance with anti-discrimination laws. In...more
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
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
On the one year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, the EEOC has issued new guidance to clarify whether employers can segregate workplace restrooms by gender or sex. While not law, this...more
Educational institutions all over the country have been grappling with the nuances of Title IX compliance since the new Title IX regulations were released last summer. With many stakeholders unhappy with the final...more
LGBTQ+ students are now protected from discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, a federal law that protects students from sex-based discrimination in public schools. As of last week, Title IX’s...more
Join Hinshaw and the LGBTQ+ Lawyers Association of Los Angeles on June 23, 2021, as we commemorate June Pride Month with a webinar featuring practical guidance on LGBTQ+ employment and workplace issues. This one-hour CLE...more
This week (specifically June 15, 2021) marked the one-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, which outlawed sexual orientation or transgender status employment...more
Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, issued a Notice of Interpretation stating that Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination against LGBTQ+ students and...more
While President Biden’s initial flurry of executive orders largely sought to address the pandemic and undo the regulatory legacy of his predecessor, one order places LGBTQ protection at the heart of the new Administration’s...more
As discussed in a prior post, OCR under the former President went to great lengths to interpret Bostock v. Clayton (which established that discrimination against someone for being transgender or homosexual was sex...more
Executive Summary: Within hours of his inauguration on January 20, 2021, President Biden signed his Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation....more
Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation - As one of his first acts as president, President Biden issued an Executive Order on Preventing and...more
As one of his first actions in office, President Joe Biden has issued an executive order ensuring that last year’s US Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County is applied immediately and efficiently by all federal...more
This past June, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County expanded the protections of Title VII, which prohibits an employer from discriminating against an employee or applicant “because of … sex,” to...more
Please join Nelson Mullins and LGBTQ+ leaders as we kick-off Atlanta Pride weekend with an online discussion of the legal and political battles ahead in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Bostock decision and rethinking...more
In light of his Supreme Court win in June. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has revived a Title VII lawsuit filed by Gerald Bostock, who had sued Clayton County, Georgia, alleging that the county terminated...more
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has blocked the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from enforcing a new rule that limited sex discrimination in healthcare to discrimination based...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a landmark civil rights decision, holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of...more
On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a watershed decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, holding, for the first time, that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) prohibits discrimination in the...more