News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Civil Rights Act › Split of Authority

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 -
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

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: The Supreme Court Issues Narrow Ruling in Title VII Case, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis

Jenner & Block on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, a closely watched employment discrimination case. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Kagan, the Court reversed the Eighth...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Supreme Court Rules Employees Need Not Show Transfer Caused ‘Significant’ Harm For Title VII Claims

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employee challenging a job transfer in an unlawful employment discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must show that the...more

Polsinelli

Unanswered Questions in Light of Supreme Court’s Title VII Ruling

Polsinelli on

In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, the United States Supreme Court held that “an employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII.”  With its decision, however, the Supreme Court...more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

Supreme Court Clarifies Race Discrimination Claims Under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Must Meet More Stringent “But-For” Causation Standard

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints on

Bringing positive news for employers and a welcome distraction from the COVID-19 crisis, the United States Supreme Court recently held that for claims of racial discrimination under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of...more

Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.

National Employment Perspective | Focus on Discrimination

Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P. on

Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Opinion Upholding But-For Causation in Section 1981 Discrimination Cases - The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion holding that a plaintiff who sues for racial discrimination in...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Supreme Court Requires But-For Causation for Section 1981 Claims

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

On March 23, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States, in Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African-American Owned Media, ruled that a plaintiff who alleges race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 must plead and...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS Sets High Bar For Those Bringing Race Discrimination Cases

Fisher Phillips on

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court last week ensured that a high standard will be used when assessing whether claims of race discrimination under Section 1981 should advance past the early stages of litigation....more

McAfee & Taft

U.S. Supreme Court confirms ‘but for’ causation in Section 1981 cases

McAfee & Taft on

Surrounded by the confusion and anxiety of the current COVID-19 pandemic, it may feel refreshing to step back and consider some of the basic tenets of employment law. The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Comcast Corp....more

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Employment Law...

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Section 1981 Racial Discrimination Claims Require But-For Causation

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Employment Law... on

In a unanimous decision issued on March 23, 2020, the United States Supreme Court held that a but-for causation standard applies to claims brought under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The Supreme Court also...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

Supreme Court Confirms Strict “But for” Causation Test Applies to Section 1981 Claims

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP on

On Monday, March 23, the United States Supreme Court, in a nearly unanimous opinion, ruled that a plaintiff asserting race discrimination claims in the making of a contract under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Section 1981) bears the...more

Franczek P.C.

Supreme Court Holds that Claims for Intentional Discrimination Under Section 1981 Must Meet “But For” Causation Test

Franczek P.C. on

Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act prohibits intentional race discrimination in all forms of contracting including employment. Lower courts have split as to whether a § 1981 plaintiff must prove that race was only one...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

2019-20 Supreme Court Update

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2019-20 term is receiving substantial attention for cases involving signature initiatives of President Donald Trump’s administration. But the Court also maintains an extensive docket directly relevant...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Supreme Court Will Render Landmark Decisions Regarding LGBTQ Protection Under Title VII

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

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

Stokes Wagner

High Court to Consider Whether Title VII Covers LGBT Bias

Stokes Wagner on

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a trio of cases asking whether federal law protects gay and transgender workers from discrimination. Currently, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it illegal for...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

SCOTUS Hears Arguments on Scope Discrimination Because of Sex Under Title VII

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

On October 8, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument on one core question: does the prohibition on discrimination “because of...sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 include...more

Snell & Wilmer

Fort Bend County v. Davis: SCOTUS Bends Employers' Defense to Title VII Claims, But Doesn't Break It

Snell & Wilmer on

On June 3, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ("Supreme Court") unanimously held in Fort Bend County v. Davis that federal courts may be able to hear claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title...more

Jackson Walker

The Labor and Employment Horizon—2019

Jackson Walker on

If there has been one constant in employment law over the last generation, it is change. The forecast for 2019 is no different. In Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Texas Legislature, employers can expect developments that...more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

Recent Supreme Court Decision Interprets ADEA to Cover State and Local Governments of Any Size

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC on

On November 6, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido, 2018 WL 5794639 (2018), and held that state and local governments of any size are covered under the Age Discrimination in...more

Baker Donelson

Unanimous Supreme Court Sides with Public Employees in Age Discrimination Fight

Baker Donelson on

In its first ruling of the new term, the United States Supreme Court unanimously sided with the Ninth Circuit in holding that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) applies to all states and political subdivisions...more

Polsinelli

ADEA Given Broader Reach than Title VII: Supreme Court Rules ADEA Covers Political Subdivisions with Less than 20 Employees

Polsinelli on

On Tuesday November 6, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) applies to state and local government employers with fewer than 20 employees. ...more

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Age Discrimination in Employment Act

Tucker Arensberg, P.C. on

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That All States and Political Subdivisions Must Comply With the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Regardless of Size - Due to a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court in Mount...more

Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP

The Supreme Court Rules that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act Applies to Small Government Employers

Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP on

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) forbids employment discrimination against employees who are 40 years of age or older. Private employers with less than 20 employees are not subject to the ADEA....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Artis v. D.C.: SCOTUS Explains How § 1367(d) Stops the Clock

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The federal supplemental jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1367, allows a litigant with a federal claim to bring into federal court with it any state claims that are so related to the federal claim that they “form part of the...more

McAfee & Taft

SCOTUS declines to determine whether Title VII covers sexual orientation

McAfee & Taft on

In a bit of a surprise move, the U.S. Supreme Court today passed on an opportunity to provide some long-awaited clarity on the interplay between sexual orientation and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Evans v....more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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