In a 7-2 decision issued today, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (U.S. No. 16-111 June 4, 2018) (J. Kennedy), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to create a cake for a gay couple’s wedding because of his claimed religious opposition to same-sex marriage. Importantly,…
Read More SCOTUS Issues Narrow Decision in Baker’s Favor in “Gay Wedding Cake” CaseIn a recent (May 29, 2018) Petition for Writ of Certiorari, filed in Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, the petitioner seeks to overturn the Second Circuit’s en banc decision holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition on discrimination based on “sex” also prohibits discrimination based on “sexual orientation.”
Read More Petition for Writ of Certiorari Asks SCOTUS to Overturn 2d Circuit En Banc Zarda Decision That Title VII Prohibits Discrimination Based on Sexual OrientationIn a pro-employer, 5-4 decision issued today – Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-285, 2018 WL 2292444 (U.S. 2018) – the U.S. Supreme Court held that mandatory arbitration agreements are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act, and that doing so does not violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). From the Opinion (per Justice…
Read More SCOTUS Upholds Arbitration AgreementsIn Artis v. District of Columbia, 2018 WL 491524 (U.S. Sup. Ct. Jan. 22, 2018), the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted a federal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d), which provides the timeframe for when state claims must be re-filed in state court after their dismissal from a federal action. In many cases, particularly employment discrimination cases,…
Read More SCOTUS Interprets Statute Relating to Timeframe For Refiling State Law Claims (Including For Employment Discrimination) When Federal Court Dismisses ThemIn McLane Co. v. E.E.O.C., No. 15-1248, 2017 WL 1199454 (U.S. Apr. 3, 2017), as revised (Apr. 3, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a district court’s decision to enforce or quash an EEOC subpoena should be reviewed for abuse of discretion, and not (as the Ninth Circuit held) de novo. The facts of the…
Read More SCOTUS Clarifies Standard For District Court Evaluation of EEOC Subpoenas in Employment Discrimination CasesIn Green v. Brennan, No. 14-613, 578 U.S. ___ (decided May 23, 2016), the Supreme Court held that the 45-day statute of limitations “clock” for purposes of a federal employee’s “constructive discharge” claim begins running on the date of the employee’s resignation, rather than on the date of the alleged discriminatory actions prompting the employee’s…
Read More SCOTUS Holds That a Constructive Discharge Claim Accrues on the Resignation Date for Statute of Limitations PurposesIn Heffernan v. City of Paterson, No. 14-1280 (decided April 26, 2016), the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a circuit court decision that affirmed the dismissal of a police officer’s First Amendment retaliation case arising from his punishment for engaging in what was (incorrectly) perceived as protected political activity. Justice Breyer authored the opinion; Justices Thomas…
Read More SCOTUS Holds That First Amendment Retaliation Case May Continue, Despite Employer’s Incorrect Belief that Employee Engaged in Protected Political ActivityUnited States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died on February 13, 2016. Many disagreed with the outspoken justice’s politics; some were happy to see him go. Many compilations of his opinions/dissents (such as this one or this one) appear to highlight his conservative ideology. Unsurprisingly missing from many such compilations is his opinion in Oncale v. Sundowner…
Read More Justice Scalia: Civil Rights Champion?In Obergefell v. Hodges, No. 14-556, 2015 WL 2473451 (U.S. June 26, 2015), the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that “a State has no constitutional obligation to license same-sex marriages or to recognize same-sex marriages performed out of State.” Justice Kennedy reversed that decision, holding that the…
Read More SCOTUS Legalizes Same-Sex MarriageTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits “disparate treatment”, or intentional discrimination, based on religion by making it unlawful for an employer to, among other things, “fail … to hire … any individual … because of such individual’s … religion”. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–2(a)(1) (emphasis added). In Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie &…
Read More U.S. Supreme Court Revives Muslim’s Bias Claim Against Abercrombie