Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Lawyer for St. Louis police sergeant hailed unanimous Supreme Court decision as a big win for workers WASHINGTON (AP) — […] The post Supreme Court makes it easier to sue for job discrimination ...
Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013), is a landmark decision [1] of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the constitutionality of two provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: Section 5, which requires certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices; and subsection (b) of Section 4 ...
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 ...
The ruling reversed a lower court decision, which the justices said swept too broadly into areas like peaceful but disruptive conduct, and returned the case to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Sally Reed was represented at the Supreme Court by Idaho lawyer Allen Derr, who argued that the Fourteenth Amendment forbids discrimination based on sex. [ 2 ] After a series of appeals by both Sally and Cecil Reed, the Supreme Court considered the case and delivered a unanimous decision that held the Idaho Code's preference in favor of males ...
Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986), was a United States Supreme Court case in which a unanimous Court found that "the legacy of official discrimination ... acted in concert with the multimember districting scheme to impair the ability of "cohesive groups of black voters to participate equally in the political process and to elect candidates of their choice."
Alito said the appeals court's "glaring constitutional error" threatens to continue the type of race-based affirmative action the court rejected in its 2023 decision.