Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Categorically Black, White, Or Wrong: 'Misperception Discrimination' And The State Of Title Vii Protection, D. Wendy Greene
Categorically Black, White, Or Wrong: 'Misperception Discrimination' And The State Of Title Vii Protection, D. Wendy Greene
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Article exposes an inconspicuous, categorically wrong movement within antidiscrimination law. A band of federal courts have denied Title VII protection to individuals who allege “categorical discrimination”: invidious, differential treatment on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, or sex. Per these courts, a plaintiff who self-identifies as Christian but is misperceived as Muslim cannot assert an actionable claim under Title VII if she suffers an adverse employment action as a result of this misperception and related animus. Though Title VII expressly prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion, courts have held that such a plaintiff’s claim of “misperception …
The Gay Accent, Gender, And Title Vii Employment Discrimination, Ryan Castle
The Gay Accent, Gender, And Title Vii Employment Discrimination, Ryan Castle
Seattle University Law Review
While race, religion, ethnicity, and sex will always remain salient social issues in our nation, sexual orientation is currently at the forefront of our national debate and will likely not abate in the foreseeable future. Federal courts, for example, struggle in differentiating sex, gender, and sexuality when adjudicating Title VII employment discrimination claims. Because Title VII does not protect employees from sexual orientation-based discrimination, plaintiffs who are or are perceived to be of a sexual minority have difficulty proving a valid sex-based discrimination claim in federal court. This difficulty arises because one cannot perceive sex, gender, and sexuality without muddling …
An Unreasonable Application Of A Reasonable Standard: Title Vii And Sexual Orientation Retaliation, Jorden Colalella
An Unreasonable Application Of A Reasonable Standard: Title Vii And Sexual Orientation Retaliation, Jorden Colalella
Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality
No abstract provided.
Is The Antidiscrimination Project Being Ended?, Michael J. Zimmer
Is The Antidiscrimination Project Being Ended?, Michael J. Zimmer
Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality
No abstract provided.
Bundy V. Jackson: Eliminating The Need To Prove Tangible Economic Job Loss In Sexual Harassment Claims Brought Under Title Vii, Terence J. Bouressa
Bundy V. Jackson: Eliminating The Need To Prove Tangible Economic Job Loss In Sexual Harassment Claims Brought Under Title Vii, Terence J. Bouressa
Pepperdine Law Review
In the case of Bundy v. Jackson, the federal appellate court eliminated the need to prove tangible job loss in claims under Title VII relating to sexual harassment. The holding in Bundy thus promotes the viability of sexual harassment claims under Title VII and deters employers from engaging in subtle sexual harassment as "part of the job." The decision provides a model for the nation to follow in the pursuit of the worthy goal of eliminating sexual harassment in the workplace.
Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company V. Eeoc: Expanding The Scope Of Title Vii , Mark D. Klein
Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company V. Eeoc: Expanding The Scope Of Title Vii , Mark D. Klein
Pepperdine Law Review
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 prohibits sex discrimination on the basis of pregnancy. In Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co. v. EEOC, the United States Supreme Court extended the scope of the Act to include not only female employees, but also female dependents of male employees. The author examines the Supreme Court's analysis of and the legislative intent behind the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and explores the future impact of the decision.
Up Or Out And Into The Supreme Court: A Forecast For Hishon V. King And Spalding , Linda Randlett Kollar
Up Or Out And Into The Supreme Court: A Forecast For Hishon V. King And Spalding , Linda Randlett Kollar
Pepperdine Law Review
The author presents an extensive analysis of Title VII in an effort to forecast the forthcoming Supreme Court decision of Hishon v. King and Spalding. Included are the issues presented to the Court, the legislative history of Title VII, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals' decision, and a historical inquiry of the applicable decisions of the Burger Court. Although the outcome of the case has yet to be decided, the author's informed prediction will guide commentaries in the future.
Who's The Boss? A Distinction Without A Difference, Lakisha A. Davis
Who's The Boss? A Distinction Without A Difference, Lakisha A. Davis
Barry Law Review
This case note provides the factual background of Vance v. Ball State and briefly summarizes the legal precedent behind the decision. It analyzes the opinion of the Court, suggesting that the decision severely limited the essential protections against workplace harassment provided by Title VII, consequently making it more difficult for employees to prove employer vicarious liability for workplace harassment.