Law Commons^™

Climate Discrimination, Duane Rudolph

Catholic University Law Review

This Article focuses on the coming legal plight of workers in the United States, who will likely face discrimination as they search for work outside their home states. The Article takes for granted that climate change will have forced those workers across state and international boundaries, a reality dramatically witnessed in the United States during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. During that environmental emergency (and the devastation it wrought), workers were forced across boundaries only to be violently discriminated against upon arrival in their new domiciles. Such discrimination is likely to recur, and it will threaten the livelihoods of …

Panel 5 - The Future Of Employment Law, Karla Gilbride, Geraldine Sumter, Stephen Rich, Marcia Mccormick, Michael Selmi

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

FACILITATOR: All right everyone, welcome to our last panel, “The Future of Employment Law.” I want to quickly introduce our moderator, Karla Gilbride, the co-director of the Access to Justice Project. Karla, you can take it away.

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 …

The Watercooler Is Safer Than The Schoolyard: Lower Courts Dismissal Of Peer Sexual Harassment Under Title Ix Is Especially Failing Our Students In The “#Metoo” World, Christine Tamer

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

While the term #MeToo was first coined in 2006, the movement came to the forefront of American life in October 2017 when actress Alyssa Milano tweeted, “if you’ve been sexually harassed or assaulted write ‘me too’ as a reply to this tweet.” Since then, the #MeToo movement has exposed the fact that sexual harassment remains all too common and has pushed for change in the legal procedures that have failed victims. In the #MeToo world, sexual harassment is “finally getting the public attention it has long deserved” and the public has come together to deem it—in one word—unacceptable.

While …

Hidden Figures: Wage Inequity And Economic Insecurity For Black Women And Other Women Of Color, Cassandra Jones Havard

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

One hundred years after women secured the right to vote, wage inequality remains prevalent in the United States. The gender wage gap, or pay inequity based solely on sex, arguably, is a measure of the current failure of full and equal participation by women in American society. The gender wage gap exists despite federal legislation designed to further wage equality. In fact, a difference as small as two cents over a lifetime costs a woman approximately $80,000. Currently, it is predicted that for a majority of white women, the pay parity will be attained between 2059–2069. However, Black women …

Transparency And Reliance In Antidiscrimination Law, Steven L. Willborn

Catholic University Law Review

All antidiscrimination laws have two structural features – transparency and reliance – that are important, even central, to their design, but have gone largely unnoticed. On transparency, some laws, like the recent salary-ban laws, attempt to prevent the employer from learning about the disfavored factor on the theory that an employer cannot rely on an unknown factor. Other laws require publication of the disfavored factor, such as salary, on the theory that it is harder to discriminate in the sunlight. Still other laws are somewhere between these two extremes. The Americans with Disabilities Act, for example, limits but does not …

Employment Law—Antidiscrimination—Falling Into The Legal Void: How Arkansas Can Protect Unpaid Interns From Discrimination And Harassment, Christina Redmann

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is Using Preferred Gender Pronouns Important In The Courtroom?, Golden Gate University School Of Law

Golden Gate University Race, Gender, Sexuality and Social Justice Law Journal

In relation to the Farmer v. Brennan, a case discussed in this blog, it is important to note that triggering language is used in the opinion, as the incorrect pronouns are used to refer to the petitioner throughout.

The use of proper gender pronouns is important to nearly every person in the world. In all cases, proper and preferred gender pronouns are the same. It is respectful and expected to use a person’s preferred pronouns e.g., the proper term for the person. Whether you are part of the LGBTQ+ community or not, the use of proper gender pronouns is only …

Liberal Feminist Jurisprudence: Foundational, Enduring, Adaptive, Linda C. Mcclain, Brittany K. Hacker

Faculty Scholarship

Liberal feminism remains a significant strand of feminist jurisprudence in the U.S. Rooted in 19th and 20th century liberal and feminist political theory and women’s rights advocacy, it emphasizes autonomy, dignity, and equality. Liberal feminism’s focus remains to challenge unjust gender-based restrictions based on assumptions about men’s and women’s proper spheres and roles. Second wave liberal legal feminism, evident in Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s constitutional litigation, challenged pervasive sex-based discrimination in law and social institutions and shifted the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause to a more skeptical review of gender-based classifications. Liberal feminists have developed robust conceptions of …

Terminated Asu Women's Lacrosse Coach Files Retaliation And Wrongful Termination Lawsuit, Erica J. Zonder, Emily J. Houghton

Human Performance Department Publications

Courtney Connor, the former women’s lacrosse coach at Arizona State University, sued the University and the Arizona Board of Regents (collectively, “ASU”) for Title VII and Title IX retaliation, as well as wrongful termination.

Can I Touch Your Hair?: Business Diversity, Slavery, Disparate Outcomes, And The Crown Act, Ashley Jones

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

This comment will begin by looking at why hair in the United States is related to issues of race. This comment will then look at how businesses’ rules for appearance and hair disproportionately affect Black employees. Next, this paper will look at Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to point out how the vague language has created loopholes, which allow businesses to lawfully discriminate against people with natural hair. We will then move to explore what role some city and state governments have had in creating natural hair-safe workspaces for employees in their respective boundaries. Lastly, we …

Gender Discrimination And Wrongful Termination During The Covid-19 Pandemic And The Age Of The At-Home Workplace, Lauren Saxe

Human Rights Brief

No abstract provided.

Bridges Of Law, Ideology, And Commitment, Steven L. Winter

Touro Law Review

Law has a distinctive temporal structure—an ontology—that defines it as a social institution. Law knits together past, present, purpose, and projected future into a demand for action. Robert Cover captures this dynamic in his metaphor of law as a bridge to an imagined future. Law’s orientation to the future necessarily poses the question of commitment or complicity. For law can shape the future only when people act to make it real. Cover’s bridge metaphor provides a lens through which to explore the complexities of law’s ontology and the pathologies that arise from its neglect or misuse. A bridge carries us …

Cause For Concern Or Cause For Celebration?: Did Bostock V. Clayton County Establish A New Mixed Motive Theory For Title Vii Cases And Make It Easier For Plaintiffs To Prove Discrimination Claims?, Terrence Cain

Faculty Scholarship

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against an employee “because of” race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This seems simple enough, but if an employer makes an adverse employment decision partly for an impermissible reason and partly for a permissible reason, i.e., if the employer acts with a mixed motive, has the employer acted “because of” the impermissible reason? According to Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the answer is no. The Courts in Gross and Nassar held that …

Race-Based Hostile Work Environment Claims In Federal And Minnesota Courts: A Historical Perspective On The Development Of The "Severe Or Pervasive" Standard, Frances Baillon, Michelle Gibbons

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article discusses the issue of whether a victim of caste discrimination based on untouchability can assert a claim of intentional employment discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981. This article contends that there are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is a form of religious discrimination under Title VII. The question of whether caste discrimination is a form of race or national origin discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981 depends upon how the courts apply these definitions to caste discrimination based on untouchability. There are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is recognized within the concept …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Cause For Concern Or Cause For Celebration?: Did Bostock V. Clayton County Establish A New Mixed Motive Theory For Title Vii Case And Make It Easier For Plaintiffs To Prove Discrimination Claims?, Terrence Cain

Seattle University Law Review

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against an employee “because of” race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This seems simple enough, but if an employer makes an adverse employment decision partly for an impermissible reason and partly for a permissible reason, i.e., if the employer acts with a mixed motive, has the employer acted “because of” the impermissible reason? According to Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the answer is no. The Courts in Gross and Nassar held …

Chambers V. District Of Columbia And The Future Of Title Vii, Andrew Melzer, Alok Nadig, Lindsay Marum

SLU Law Journal Online

Can blatant workplace discrimination escape the grasp of Title VII? In Chambers v. District of Columbia, the D.C. Circuit is considering whether to revisit a rule that employment discrimination must result in “objectively tangible harm” to give rise to a Title VII claim. In this article, the authors argue that the D.C. Circuit should stay true to the language and purpose of Title VII and adopt a standard similar to the simple “treated less well” test used under the NYC Human Rights Law.

Bostock Was Bogus: Textualism, Pluralism, And Title Vii, Mitchell N. Berman, Guha Krishnamurthi

Notre Dame Law Review

In Bostock v. Clayton County, one of the blockbuster cases from its 2019 Term, the Supreme Court held that federal antidiscrimination law prohibits employment discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. Unsurprisingly, the result won wide acclaim in the mainstream legal and popular media. Results aside, however, the reaction to Justice Neil Gorsuch’s majority opinion, which purported to ground the outcome in a textualist approach to statutory interpretation, was more mixed. The great majority of commentators, both liberal and conservative, praised Justice Gorsuch for what they deemed a careful and sophisticated—even “magnificent” and “exemplary”—application of textualist principles, …

We're All Originalists Now… Or Are We?: Bostock's Misperceived Quest To Distinguish Title Vii's Meaning From The Public's Expectations, Steven Semeraro

Hofstra Law Review

Two principal tenets underlie originalism-textualism: First, judicial interpreters of a statute should not use modern values to supplant original meaning because the law should change only through democratic processes. Second, original meaning is limited to the intersubjective original understanding that a reasonable reader would draw from a statute’s text. Meaning does not include anyone’s extratextual subjective expectations about how a statute should apply.

The divided Bostock Court’s decision that Title VII prohibits sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination reveals a contradiction between originalism-textualisms dual tenets. The mid-1960s public’s expectations about how Title VII would apply to sexual orientation and gender …

Menstruation Discrimination And The Problem Of Shadow Precedents, Deborah Widiss

Articles by Maurer Faculty

A burgeoning menstrual justice movement calls attention to menstruation-related discrimination in workplaces, schools, prisons, and many other aspects of life. In recent years, a few courts have suggested such discrimination could violate Title VII, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in employment. Their analysis focuses on the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), an amendment to Title VII passed to override a Supreme Court case that had held pregnancy discrimination was not sex discrimination.

This essay, written for a symposium at Columbia Law School, applies my earlier research on the statutory interpretation of Congressional overrides to highlight two potential challenges this …

Maternity Rights: A Comparative View Of Mexico And The United States, Roberto Rosas

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Women play a large role in the workplace and require additional protection during pregnancy, childbirth, and while raising children. This article compares how Mexico and the United States have approached the issue of maternity rights and benefits. First, Mexico provides eighty-four days of paid leave to mothers, while the United States provides unpaid leave for up to twelve weeks. Second, Mexico allows two thirty-minute breaks a day for breastfeeding, while the United States allows a reasonable amount of time per day to breastfeed. Third, Mexico provides childcare to most federal employees, while the United States provides daycares to a small …

Caste Discrimination And Federal Employment Law In The United States, Brian Elzweig

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Indiana Federal Court Rejects Public School Teacher’S Religious Discrimination Claim Over Misgendering Discharge, Arthur S. Leonard

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

Unilateral Burdens And Third-Party Harms: Abortion Conscience Laws As Policy Outliers, Nadia Sawicki

Indiana Law Journal

Most conscience laws establish nearly absolute protections for health care providers unwilling to participate in abortion. Providers’ rights to refuse—and relatedly, their immunity from civil liability, employment discrimination, and other adverse consequences—are often unqualified, even in situations where patients are likely to be harmed. These laws impose unilateral burdens on third parties in an effort to protect the rights of conscientious refusers. As such, they are outliers in the universe of federal and state anti-discrimination and religious freedom statutes, all of which strike a more even balance between individual rights and the prevention of harm to third parties. This Article …

Undocumented Domestic Workers: A Penumbra In The Workforce, Abigail A. Roman

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Modernizing Discrimination Law: The Adoption Of An Intersectional Lens, Marisa K. Sanchez

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Employer Liability For Sex Harassment Through The Lens Of Restorative Justice, Emily Rees

Cleveland State Law Review

Title VII cases alleging sex harassment have become almost completely deferential to employers who have anti-harassment policies. In this Note, I discuss legal and sociological influences on this development and propose using restorative justice focused mediation to avoid rendering Title VII entirely ineffective. Mediation should only be compelled as a remedy—after a court finds that harassment occurred, but that the plaintiff cannot prove her employer knew about the harassment. Instead of dismissing these cases—where judges have already found illegal discrimination—some corrective action should be imposed on the employer for its failure to maintain a harassment-free workplace. Focusing mediation on principles …

How To Look Like A Lawyer, Ann Juliano

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

Law schools often claim that they are teaching students “how to think like a lawyer.” What is less touted, however, is that students are learning how to look like a lawyer. They receive this message from multiple sources (faculty, alumni, peers, the career office) concerning a variety of situations: class, interviews, moot court, trial team, symposia and conferences. For law students who are first generation, these sources may be the only avenue (apart from the entertainment industry) of determining how to look like a lawyer. For law students who are transgender or gender non-binary, dress code advice dispensed along …