July 13, 2022
In the first half of 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court delved into hot-button issues when it invalidated the Labor Department's COVID-19 vaccine-or-testing emergency rule and ruled that a high school football coach was unconstitutionally punished for praying on the field after games. Here, Law360 looks at four of the most notable discrimination and workplace safety decisions so far in 2022.
June 03, 2022
The D.C. Circuit declared Friday that discriminatory job transfers can qualify as bias that violates federal law, in an en banc decision striking down its 1999 ruling that said employers could make transfer decisions based on protected characteristics without triggering Title VII liability unless a worker could show "objectively tangible harm."
January 03, 2022
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to hear a Christian football coach's case claiming his rights were violated when he was suspended for refusing to forgo his postgame prayer ritual, while the D.C. Circuit is poised to rule on whether Title VII forbids job transfers that stem from bias. Here are five discrimination cases employment attorneys should have on their radar in 2022.
October 26, 2021
A full D.C. Circuit panel spent nearly three hours Tuesday morning delving deep into the hypotheticals of employment discrimination to determine whether transferring or refusing to transfer an employee based on their race or gender violates Title VII.
July 07, 2021
An employment attorneys organization and a progressive think tank urged the D.C. Circuit this week to set precedent that discriminatory job transfers are covered by Title VII regardless of whether employees suffer monetary harm as a result.
May 06, 2021
The full D.C. Circuit will review a February ruling against a D.C. attorney general's office employee who claimed she was denied lateral transfers because of her gender, reconsidering a 20-year-old circuit precedent that some judges have said contradicts federal anti-discrimination law.
February 22, 2021
A D.C. Circuit panel refused to revive a gender bias case brought by a worker in the D.C. attorney general's office who said she was unlawfully denied lateral transfers, though two circuit judges said the full court should revisit its interpretation of the law.