Law Commons^™

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 …

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.

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.

A Textuary Ray Of Hope For Lgbtq+ Workers: Does Title Vii Mean What It Says?, Eduardo Juarez

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

Abstract forthcoming.

Breaking The Silence: Holding Texas Lawyers Accountable For Sexual Harassment, Savannah Files

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Following the 2017 exposure of Harvey Weinstein, the #MeToo movement spread rapidly across social media platforms calling for increased awareness of the prevalence of sexual harassment and assault and demanding change. The widespread use of the hashtag brought attention to the issue and successfully facilitated a much-needed discussion in today’s society. However, this is not the first incident prompting a demand for change.

Efforts to bring awareness and exact change in regards to sexual harassment in the legal profession date back to the 1990s. This demonstrates that the legal profession is not immune from these issues. In fact, at least …

John Jay, Discrimination, And Tenure., Guillermo S. Dekat

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

American courts should cease allowing the academic deference doctrine to interfere with tenure decision cases and treat tenure decisions the same way they treat any other employment discrimination case. Unlike recent court precedent that holds that summary judgement and judgement as a matter of law should not be granted when the employer’s defenses are vague and subjective, or when they heavily rely on testimony of interested parties, this principle has yet to be applied to a plaintiff in a tenure case. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit provided five reasons for distinguishing between tenure decisions and regular employment …

Reeves V. Sanderson Plumbing Products: The Emperor Has No Clothes - Pretext Plus Is Alive And Kicking., Matthew R. Scott, Russell D. Chapman

St. Mary's Law Journal

Before the Supreme Court’s decision in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., the Fifth Circuit’s en banc decision in Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools established the proper standard of causation in employment discrimination cases. The plaintiff must prove his or her protected trait was the “determinative reason” for the challenged employment action. Following Reeves, which appeared to overrule Rhodes and the doctrine of pretext plus, the Fifth Circuit struggled with the causation question. Despite the apparent confusion, the Fifth Circuit has largely reaffirmed not only its commitment to the Rhodes pretext-plus analysis, but also the determinative-reason standard for pretext cases. …

Employment Law - Racial Discrimination - Circumstantial Evidence Of Racial Discrimination May Be Introduced To Raise A Genuine Issue Of Material Fact, Patricia W. Moore

Faculty Articles

In Hopson v. DaimlerChrysler, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decided whether summary judgment was appropriate for the defendant on racial discrimination claims based on violations of Title VII, 42 United States Code § 2000e-2000e-17 and the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, Michigan Compiled Laws Annotated 37.2101.

Making Sense Of Pretext: An Analysis Of Evidentiary Requirements For Summary Judgment Litigants In The Fifth Circuit In Light Of Reeves V. Sanderson Plumbing Prodcuts, And A Proposal For Clarification., Eric S. Riester

St. Mary's Law Journal

Although the United States Supreme Court in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. attempted to clarify the summary judgment landscape of Title VII employment discrimination cases, lower courts in the Fifth Circuit are still without guidance. Under Reeves, direct proof of discrimination is not required to defeat a motion for summary judgment as long as the circumstantial evidence allows a reasonable inference of discrimination. The required strength of the circumstantial evidence, however, remains a major issue in the Fifth Circuit. Since Reeves, the Fifth Circuit has not stated a uniform summary judgment standard, nor has it answered how much circumstantial …

Defining “Church” In American Law, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

Balancing the autonomy of religious organizations against regulatory laws remains both a difficult and hotly contested issue. It is helpful to survey labor, property, tax, and education laws to illustrate the tensions between religion and government in American law.

Labor law cases show the autonomy of religious organizations concerning governmental regulations through the National Labor Relations Act and Title VII. In regard to church property, the government has an interest in regulating how religious organizations buy and sell land, run day care centers and food kitchens, raise and borrow money, commit torts, and enter into contracts. Section 501(c)(3) of the …

42 U.S.C. 1981 Does Not Provide A Remedy For Racial Harassment During Employment., Jeffrey A. Lacy

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, the United States Supreme Court held 42 U.S.C. § 1981 does not provide a remedy for racial harassment during employment. In 1976, in Runyon v. McCrary, the Court expanded the scope of § 1981 to cover private discrimination in contractual settings, including racial discrimination in private schools, when previously unavailable. More than a decade after the Runyon decision, the Supreme Court in Patterson, established that there were limits to § 1981’s applicability in private racial discrimination claims. Specifically, the Court held while § 1981 prohibits discriminatory conduct while entering into or enforcing a contract, …