U.S. Supreme Court Issues Two Title VII Decisions Favorable for EmployersRosemary Alito
InMuldrow v. City of St. Louis, No. 22-193, the Supreme Court considered whether Title VII1prohibits discrimination in employee transfer decisions absent a separate determination that the transfer decision caused a “significant” disadvantage. InMuldrow,Jatonya Muldrow, a...
Parents of religious school students may receive state aid, Supreme Court says. Richard R. Hammar Supreme Court Rules that Title VII’s Ban on “Sex” Discrimination Includes Sexual Orientation Why the Supreme Court’s Title VII decision changes the definition of “sex” discrimination–...
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo ruled that a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2020 holding that a law barring workplace discrimination protects gay and transgender employees did not apply to the healthcare law. The ruling by Kacsmaryk, an appointee of former...
Although it is clear that a defendant must timely object to preserve a Batson claim, the United States Supreme Court has declined to decide precisely when an objection must be made. Batson, 476 U.S. at 99-100, 106 S.Ct. at 1724-25; Ford v. Georgia, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 111...
The US Supreme Court issued a landmark decision on June 29, 2023 regarding challenges to race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC). In a 6–3 decision split along ideological lines (the vote was 6
[2] Interpretations of Title VII, § 703 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) (1982) are not binding on this court, but are instructive and lend support to our decision herein. See Davis v. Department of Labor & Indus., 94 Wn.2d 119,615 P.2d 1279...
Supreme Court on the grounds that his First and 14th Amendments rights were being violated. The court upheld the law in a unanimous 9-0 decision, definitively ruling that child pornography is an exception to the First Amendment. [Pictured: The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington D.C....
(SUCH AS A REQUEST FOR PUBLIC INJUNCTIVE RELIEF), AND ALL APPEALS FROM THAT DECISION HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED (OR THE DECISION IS OTHERWISE FINAL), THE PARTIES AGREE THAT THE PARTICULAR CLAIM OR REQUEST FOR RELIEF MAY PROCEED IN A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION BUT SHALL BE STAYED PENDING ...
I invite you to a briefing call this coming Thursday to learn more about these scenarios before the Supreme Court decision is released. This is a great opportunity for you to get ahead of the curve and start figuring out what actions you will want to take after a decision comes down. ...