Sex Discrimination - Orientation And Identity

The Biden administration’s Executive Order 13988, “ Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation ,” expands prohibited forms of sex discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to incl

Executive Summary : Within hours of his inauguration on January 20, 2021, President Biden signed his Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation. The Executive Order establishes the new administration’s policy prohibiting discrimin

As 2021 begins, Jackson Lewis is again providing “The Year Ahead for Employers” to clients. This comprehensive report covers all aspects of employment law and highlights 2020 issues, trends, legislative and regulatory activity, and litigation that employers need to be aware of and what to look out f

Some anticipate that President-elect Joseph Biden will revoke the Trump administration’s Executive Order (EO) 13950 that restricts the content of certain diversity-related workplace trainings. On December 22, 2020, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued a nat

On September 22, 2020, President Trump signed Executive Order 13950, Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping (the “EO”), which indicates that it seeks to “combat offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating,” and end so-called “divisive concepts” promulgated in workplace employ

On September 22, 2020, President Trump signed Executive Order 13950, Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping (the “EO”), which seeks to “combat offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating,” and end so-called “divisive concepts” covered in some of these workplace trainings.

Following the “Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping” Executive Order (EO), which requires the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) to set up a hotline and investigate complaints of violations, OFCCP has issued a press release providing additional information and reporting the launch

San Francisco Littler attorneys Julie Stockton and Courtney Chambers address gender identity and sexual orientation issues in the workplace. In this episode they are joined by Anne Sanchez LaWer, an employee benefits attorney in Littler’s San Jose office, as they discuss the implications of the rece

In this first of a series of podcasts, San Francisco Littler attorneys Julie Stockton and Courtney Chambers explain Bostock v. Clayton County , the U.S. Supreme Court decision recognizing protections for gay, lesbian, and transgender individuals under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as well as ou

On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia , holding that, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, covered employers may not discriminate against applicants or employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gende

On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia , holding that, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, covered employers may not discriminate against applicants or employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gende

Most employer-sponsored health plans will be exempt from the primary Affordable Care Act (ACA) provision governing race, color, age, sex, disability, and national origin discrimination under new final rules issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Only plans (or other covere

The recent Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia decision, in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that an employer that fires an individual for being gay or transgender violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, has received a tremendous amount of attention. The Court’s decision

On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 6-3 decision, held Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition of sex discrimination encompassed discrimination against gay and transgender individuals. Two dissents followed the majority’s opinion—Justice Samuel Alito, Jr.’s

On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition of sex discrimination encompasses discrimination against gay and transgender individuals. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the 6-3 majority opinion and was joined by Chief Justice

On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court published its opinion resolving three cases, Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., Bostock v. Clayton County, and EEOC v. R.G. &. G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc.

By: Supreme Court Rules That Title VII Protects LGBTQ From Employment Discrimination This morning, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion (authored by Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch) holding that Title VII’s protections against sex discrimination in the workplace apply to LGBTQ employees.

On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled, in a 6-to-3 decision, that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from firing workers for being homosexual or transgender.

Several states have introduced legislation to require transgender student-athletes at the elementary and secondary school levels to compete based only on their sex assigned at birth, not based on their gender identity.

Whether a gender bias case can proceed as a class action is the question the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, will decide.