Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil Rights Act of 1964 (2)
- United States Supreme Court (2)
- Women (2)
- Abortion (1)
- Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications (1)
-
- Circuit courts (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Drivers (1)
- Employees (1)
- Employers (1)
- Employment Opportunity Commission (1)
- Employment discrimination (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Gender and Law (1)
- Gender and law (1)
- Health care (1)
- Judicial interpretation (1)
- LGBTQ+ (1)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1)
- Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1)
- Precedent (1)
- Pregnancy (1)
- Ridesharing (1)
- Texas (1)
- Title VII (1)
- Transgender (1)
- Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Because Of Bostock, Noelle N. Wyman
Because Of Bostock, Noelle N. Wyman
Michigan Law Review Online
On a below-freezing January morning, Jennifer Chavez, an automobile technician, sat in a car that she was repairing to keep warm while waiting for delayed auto parts to arrive. Without intending to, she nodded off. Her employer promptly fired her for sleeping on the job. At least, that is the justification her employer gave. But Chavez had reason to believe that her coming out as transgender motivated the termination. In the months leading up to the January incident, Chavez’s supervisor had told her to “tone things down” when she talked about her gender transition. The repair-shop owner said that the …
Unduly Burdening Women’S Health: How Lower Courts Are Undermining Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Leah M. Litman
Unduly Burdening Women’S Health: How Lower Courts Are Undermining Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Leah M. Litman
Michigan Law Review Online
At the end of the Supreme Court’s 2016 Term, the Court issued its decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. One of the more closely watched cases of that Term, Hellerstedt asked whether the Supreme Court would adhere to its prior decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed that women have a constitutionally protected right to decide to end a pregnancy.
The state of Texas had not formally requested that the Court revisit Casey or the earlier decision Casey had affirmed, Roe v. Wade, in Hellerstedt. But that was what Texas was, in effect, asking …
Portlandia, Ridesharing, And Sex Discrimination, Ari Herbert
Portlandia, Ridesharing, And Sex Discrimination, Ari Herbert
Michigan Law Review Online
This Essay discusses and assesses the legal hurdles that See Jane Go and SafeHer may face. Part I of this Essay explains how the plain text of Title VII and the pertinent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guideline can fairly be read either to allow or condemn See Jane Go and SafeHer’s hiring practices. Part II then highlights precedent that supports See Jane Go’s and SafeHer’s discriminatory driver–passenger practices. Part III concludes by arguing that the legal system ought to make room for apps like See Jane Go and SafeHer in the current framework.