Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Bostock v. Clayton County (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
- Civil Rights Act (1)
- Contractors (1)
- Derivative intergovernmental immunity (1)
-
- Derivative sovereign immunity (1)
- Federal government (1)
- Homosexual (1)
- Intersex (1)
- LGBT (1)
- LGBTQ (1)
- LGBTQ+ (1)
- Preemption (1)
- Qualified immunity (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Sex trait discrimination (1)
- Sovereign partners (1)
- Sovereign shield defenses (1)
- Title VII (1)
- Transgender (1)
- U.S. Supreme Court (1)
- Workplace discrimination (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Sex Trait Discrimination: Intersex People And Title Vii After Bostock V. Clayton County, Sam Parry
Sex Trait Discrimination: Intersex People And Title Vii After Bostock V. Clayton County, Sam Parry
Washington Law Review
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from workplace discrimination and harassment on account of sex. Courts have historically failed to extend Title VII protections to LGBTQ+ people. However, in 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County changed this. Bostock explicitly extended Title VII’s protections against workplace discrimination to “homosexual” and “transgender” people, reasoning that it is impossible to discriminate against an employee for being gay or transgender without taking the employee’s sex into account. While Bostock is a win for LGBTQ+ rights, the opinion leaves several questions unanswered. The reasoning in …
Qualified Sovereignty, Kate Sablosky Elengold, Jonathan D. Glater
Qualified Sovereignty, Kate Sablosky Elengold, Jonathan D. Glater
Washington Law Review
Sometimes acts of the federal government cause harm; sometimes acts of contractors hired by the federal government cause harm. In cases involving the latter, federal contractors often invoke the sovereign’s constitutionally granted and doctrinally expanded supremacy to restrict avenues for the injured to recover even from private actors. In prior work, we analyzed how federal contractors exploit three “sovereign shield” defenses—preemption, derivative sovereign immunity, and derivative intergovernmental immunity—to evade liability, accountability, and oversight.
This Article considers whether, when, and how private federal contractors should be held accountable in a court of law. We argue that a contractor should be required …