News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Title VII › 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 -
Akerman LLP - HR Defense

U.S. Supreme Court to Review Reverse Discrimination Standard

Akerman LLP - HR Defense on

Should an employee’s burden to plead and prove workplace discrimination differ depending upon whether they are considered in a “majority” or “minority” group? The U.S. Supreme Court is now set to decide whether an arguably...more

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

SCOTUS Takes Up Another Case With DEI Implications

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

Last week, the Supreme Court accepted review of Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The court will address a circuit split regarding the standard courts apply in discrimination claims brought by majority group...more

Lathrop GPM

Title VII & Lateral Transfers - Treacherous Territory after United States Supreme Court Ruling

Lathrop GPM on

The United States Supreme Court recently settled a circuit split concerning when an involuntary lateral transfer may violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court’s opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Shifting Views on Paid Administrative Leave

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Employers often place employees on paid administrative leave while they investigate accusations of employee misconduct or make decisions regarding the employees’ employment. Traditionally, most federal courts agreed that this...more

Butler Snow LLP

Discriminatory or Just Cheap? Eleventh Circuit Panel Rules that Employer-Sponsored Health Plans Must Cover Gender-Affirming Care;...

Butler Snow LLP on

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

PilieroMazza PLLC

Supreme Court Opens Door to Broader Spectrum of Employment Discrimination Cases

PilieroMazza PLLC on

In April 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held that transferring an employee to a new position with the same rank and pay may constitute an adverse action under Title VII. The recent decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis,...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS 2023/24 Lookback and Preview: 8 Key Rulings that Impact the Workplace and 4 New Cases for Employers to Track Next Term

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court issued several momentous decisions last term that will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...more

Perkins Coie

June Tip of the Month: Updated EEOC Guidance Enhances Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Protections

Perkins Coie on

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

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Title VII Employment Claims

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employees alleging employment discrimination to show they suffered an adverse employment action as a result of their membership in a protected class....more

Polsinelli

No Harm, No Foul: The Supreme Court Reduces “Harm” Standard for Discriminatory Job Transfer Claims under Title VII

Polsinelli on

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, that to sustain a prima facie case of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), plaintiffs do...more

Locke Lord LLP

High Court Update: Recent US Supreme Court Rulings Employers Should Know About

Locke Lord LLP on

Thus far, 2024 has been a whirlwind of new employment rules, statutes, guidance, and decisions for employers to grapple with and account for in their businesses. Among these decisions are a handful of rulings from the Supreme...more

Franczek P.C.

Recent Supreme Court Decision Clarifies Lower Standard of Harm for Job Transfers under Title VII

Franczek P.C. on

In a recent decision, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard for determining whether an adverse employment action is a sufficient basis for a discrimination claim under Title VII of the...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

Saul Ewing LLP

Employees No Longer Required to Prove Significant Harm for Title VII Claims

Saul Ewing LLP on

Under the recent Supreme Court Ruling of Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, employees no longer need to suffer “significant” harm to state a claim of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”)....more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Sixth Circuit Rules That Accommodation Requests Under the ADA Can Be Inferred Without Explicit Employee Request

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which lowered the threshold for employees to demonstrate discrimination under Title VII, the Sixth Circuit has expanded the scope of what employers...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Title VII Doesn’t Require ‘Significance Test,’ Supreme Court Rules

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

A Title VII plaintiff does not need to demonstrate that the injury alleged satisfies a significance test, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled. ...more

Dentons

Promotion and Demotion – What to Watch For

Dentons on

In a recent U.S. Supreme Court case, a police sergeant alleged that she was transferred from one job to a less desirable job in the police department because of her sex....more

Akerman LLP

How Much Worse Off Must an Employee Be Post-Job Transfer to State a Title VII Claim?

Akerman LLP on

In what may be considered a “win” for employees, the United States Supreme Court recently clarified that an employee challenging a job transfer as “discriminatory” need only prove that they sustained “some” harm due to the...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

Employers Beware: Title VII Now Allows Employees to More Easily Challenge Your Decision to Transfer or Reassign Them

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more

Venable LLP

Labor Pains: You Moved My Parking Spot! I'm Suing

Venable LLP on

Picture this: You're just about set to open a new workplace in Smallsville. The only hurdle remaining is finding the right person to manage the new location. After giving this problem considerable thought, you think you've...more

Lerch, Early & Brewer

What Employers Need to Know About the Recent Supreme Court Decision in Muldrow

Lerch, Early & Brewer on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Muldrow vs. City of St. Louis, which held that Title VII – which bars employers from discriminating in decisions involving among other things, lateral transfers – does...more

ArentFox Schiff

Do No Harm: SCOTUS Makes it Easier for Employees to Succeed on Discrimination Claims Based on Internal Job Transfers

ArentFox Schiff on

When transferring an employee or making changes to their job duties, employers now face an increased risk of claims under Title VII. On April 17, the US Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs alleging discrimination...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Supreme Court Expands Workers’ Ability to Sue Based on Job Transfer

Bricker Graydon LLP on

In a recently decided case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a job transfer may demonstrate adverse action even when the transfer does not result in a loss of pay or other benefit. A unanimous Court held in Muldrow v. City of...more

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

SCOTUS Alert: Muldrow Moves the Title VII Bar

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Muldrow v. St. Louis that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discriminatory job transfers, even if the harm is not “significant.”...more

Cranfill Sumner LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Employment Discrimination Claims: Only “Some Injury” Required

Cranfill Sumner LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis (No. 22-193) and held that “some injury” is sufficient to establish a federal discrimination or...more

367 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 15
Next »

"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