LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
U.S. Supreme Court Allows Retaliatory Discharge Lawsuits By Persons Sufficiently Close To An Employee Who Makes A Discrimination Charge; Will New York State Courts Do The Same?

The anti-retaliation provision of Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended ("Title VII") prohibits an employer from "discriminat[ing] against any of his employees . . . because he has made a charge" under Title VII. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a). Title VII allows "a...

U.S. Supreme Court Bars Ministers From Suing Their Churches For Discriminatory Termination

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states in part: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . ." The first of these two quoted clauses is known as the Establishment Clause. The second of these two quoted...

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Arguments on EEOC’s Duty to Conciliate

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) Since the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, must first attempt to resolve a claim of bias against a private employer through conciliation before filing suit, the court may conduct a “modest inquiry”...

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Arguments in EEOC, Abercrombie Dispute

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey's) The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in ruling in favor of a clothing retailer that refused to hire a Muslim applicant who wore a headscarf during her interview, Principal Duty Solicitor General Ian H. Gershengorn of Washington argued before the U.S. Supreme...

Reading the #SCOTUS Tea Leaves: Headscarves, Religious Accommodations, and Abercrombie

Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. ( transcript here [pdf] ), which will hopefully determine the circumstances under which an employer must, as a religious accommodation, grant an exception to its “Look Policy” for a hijab-wearing...

U.S. Supreme Court Vacates Fourth Circuit’s Pregnancy Discrimination Ruling

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) A pregnant worker who seeks to demonstrate disparate treatment via indirect evidence may do so under the framework established in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973) [ an enhanced version of this opinion is available to lexis.com subscribers...

McDonnell Douglas Lives! Supreme Court Applies Decades-Old Test to Pregnancy Accommodation Claims

This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court issued one of its most anticipated employment-law rulings of this term, in Young v. United Parcel Service [pdf] [lexis.com subscribers may access Supreme Court briefs and an enhanced opinion for this case]. The case asked under what circumstances an employer must...