Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In a unanimous decision vacating the decision of the Ninth Circuit and remanding the case to be reheard, the Court sided with Comcast's "but-for" test, in that Allen had to have shown that race was the sole deciding factor for the case, rather than the possibility that it may have only been a motivating factor.
Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court civil rights decision in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination because of sexuality or gender identity.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday made it easier for workers who are transferred from one job to another against their will to pursue job discrimination claims under federal civil rights law, even ...
In response to this question the Court held that persons of Arabian ancestry were protected from racial discrimination under Section 1981. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice White maintained that section 1981 encompassed discrimination even among Caucasians. Justice White noted that history did not support the claim that Arabs and other ...
In employment discrimination cases where the only evidence of discrimination is indirect, courts evaluate the claim under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework. To have an actionable claim under Title VII, and other employment discrimination statutes, the plaintiff must make out a prima facie (on its face) case of discrimination. This ...
Barrett wrote a unanimous three-judge panel decision in 2019 making it easier for men alleged to have committed sexual assaults on campus to challenge the proceedings against them.
By a unanimous 8-0 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that anti-discrimination laws forbid employers from firing a complaining employee's fiance. In the case of Thompson v. North American Stainless ...
In an 8–1 decision, [1] the Court held that denying equal access to the religious club violated the Equal Access Act, and that treating a religious club equally, including providing a sponsor like other clubs, would not constitute an endorsement of religion prohibited by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.