All articles tagged with #title vii
A federal judge dismissed the remaining claims in Asha Daniels’ suit against Lizzo and her production company, ruling that the alleged hostile workplace and disability allegations did not meet Title VII or ADA standards. The decision follows earlier dismissals, with Daniels’ counsel signaling potential next steps, while other dancer lawsuits tied to Lizzo continue, and the prior fat-shaming claim having been dismissed in 2025.
A class-action lawsuit filed by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation and Correia & Puth argues that the Trump administration’s ban on insurance coverage for gender-affirming care in federal employee plans violates Title VII by discriminating based on sex, affecting about 8.3 million people and 39,400 enrollees; the policy removed coverage (except for mental health counseling) and a vague mid-treatment carve-out that ends in 2027, forcing some workers to pay out-of-pocket or forgo care, while medical groups deem the care medically necessary.
Since the 2020 ruling extending Title VII protections to transgender workers, the Supreme Court’s trajectory has tilted toward restricting transgender rights in several areas: upholding state bans on transgender women competing in women’s sports, allowing restrictions on gender‑affirming care for transgender youth and on transgender military service, and signaling that the reach of Bostock may not extend beyond employment. The court’s composition has shifted with Barrett’s appointment, public opinion has grown more divided, and momentum appears to be moving toward more restrictions despite ongoing challenges by advocates and continued litigation in related areas.
The Department of Justice has opened a civil rights investigation into Major League Baseball following the Giants’ Pride Night hat incident, referring MLB to the EEOC for potential Title VII violations and arguing the case highlights a perceived double standard compared with past support for social-justice messages.
Trump-appointed EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas proposed rescinding the 1972 'Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII' rule, which narrows when race can be used to address past discrimination. The change would make it easier for white men to sue over workplace bias and reflects Lucas's broader effort to portray DEI as illegal race-based discrimination, drawing criticism from former commissioners and activists who say it undermines protections for people of color and women; the move comes as the EEOC has shifted enforcement priorities away from its previous DEI-friendly plan.
Several Jewish Columbia University faculty filed EEOC claims alleging a hostile climate for Jews amid Gaza protests, arguing harassment stemmed from pro‑Palestinian advocacy and that the university suppressed dissent while casting Jews as tied to Israel; the filings come as part of a window closing on a Trump-era settlement that included a $21 million fund for Jewish employees, and describe doxxing, threats, and disciplinary actions linked to advocacy.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York accusing The New York Times of discriminating against a well-qualified white male employee by denying him a promotion, citing the Times’ DEI policies and a 2021 Call to Action. The Times denies the allegations, saying promotions are merit-based, and will defend itself. This case adds to a string of litigation involving the Times and the Trump administration in recent years.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Coca-Cola Beverages Northeast alleging that a two‑day, women‑only employer‑sponsored networking trip in Connecticut violated Title VII by excluding male employees; attendees were paid as usual and not required to take time off, prompting concerns about DEI policies at work.
The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is probing Nike for alleged discrimination against White employees, citing Nike’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion targets. The agency’s subpoena seeks information back to 2018 on race-based workforce quotas, layoffs and promotions allegedly influenced by race, and 16 mentoring programs that were race-restricted. Nike says it’s cooperating and called the action a surprising escalation. EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas says the agency is renewing its focus on evenhanded enforcement of Title VII, reflecting a broader shift in enforcement priorities under the current administration’s stance on DEI initiatives.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that it is easier to bring lawsuits for reverse discrimination, siding with an Ohio woman who claimed she was passed over for a job and demoted because she is heterosexual, emphasizing that federal civil rights law does not distinguish between majority and minority groups.
The Supreme Court has revived a woman's reverse discrimination claim, ruling that individuals from majority groups can bring discrimination cases under Title VII without higher standards, potentially easing the path for such claims in the future.
In the Muldrow v. St. Louis case, the Supreme Court delivered a significant victory for civil rights by unanimously siding with Jatonya Muldrow, a police officer who argued she was discriminated against on the basis of sex when she was transferred to a less active job. Justice Elena Kagan wrote a strong opinion, maintaining the harm requirement for Title VII claims, which prevented the case from being used to attack diversity initiatives and DEI training. The decision narrowly avoided the risk of being used to combat workplace diversity and secured a meaningful victory for the left, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh being the only dissenting voice.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of a female police sergeant in St. Louis, making it easier for workers to pursue employment discrimination claims over job transfers. The decision clarifies that employees only need to show some harm from a forced transfer, rather than a "significant disadvantage," to prevail in court. This ruling is expected to lower the bar for employees to proceed with discrimination claims and could lead to an increase in reverse discrimination claims against workplace diversity programs. The case has been sent back to the lower courts for additional proceedings that account for the high court's ruling.
The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of St Louis police officer Jatonya Muldrow, directing a lower court to reconsider her workplace sex discrimination lawsuit. The case tests the scope of federal workplace protections and whether discrimination must cause tangible harm. Muldrow claimed she was transferred to an undesirable job because of her sex, while the city of St Louis argued routine transfers. The Biden administration supported Muldrow, urging a broad application of Title VII, which bars discrimination based on sex.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of making it easier for employees to sue employers for discrimination when they are involuntarily transferred. The decision, written by Justice Elena Kagan, supported a St. Louis police sergeant's claim of gender discrimination after being forced to transfer out of an intelligence division. The ruling clarified that an employee need not show a "materially significant" disadvantage to sue for discrimination, and the case will continue in a lower federal court. Conservative Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh agreed with the outcome but questioned the court's rationale, with Alito describing the opinion as "unhelpful."