Search for: "DOES I-VII"
Results 1 - 20
of 3,565
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Nov 2009, 9:11 pm
Title VII does not extend to protect military personnel. [read post]
2 May 2013, 7:42 am
Howard I. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 6:26 am
I will leave it to the Court of Appeals to frame the issue in this case: "This case asks us to resolve a vexed and recurring question: what does it mean to be Hispanic? [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 6:14 am
Title VII does not mention sexual orientation as a protected class. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 5:31 am
Does Title VII prohibit discrimination based on sex or not? [read post]
22 Apr 2019, 11:02 am
This is bad news, I fear: although many U.S. courts of appeals have applied the law to discrimination against gay and transgender employees, I strongly suspect this now very conservative Supreme Court will hold that Title VII does not cover... [read post]
21 May 2007, 11:36 am
As I said before, my casebook does not include the classic coronation cases, arising out of the postponed coronation King Edward VII, pictured at left. [read post]
9 Aug 2023, 12:15 am
I did not consider whether "may" could mean "does". [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 4:58 am
Title VII does not protect against discrimination based on traits, even a trait that has a socio-cultural racial significance. [read post]
1 May 2007, 9:11 am
Marty Katz (Denver) raises an issue I haven't encountered before: does the 1991 Civil Rights Act apply to pregnancy discrimination cases? [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 4:37 am
This does not mean that I am an atheist, or a pagan, or a heathen, or whatever other aspersion you’d like to cast upon me. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 5:11 am
A week ago, I scoffed at a claim in a lawsuit against Bayer that it violated Title VII by failing to provide work-life balance that was attractive to women seeking promotion. [read post]
1 Dec 2016, 4:51 am
I’ll repeat what I said a earlier this year when the 7th Circuit announced its original decision: On this issue, ignore Title VII, ignore the EEOC, and ignore the courts, and just do what is right. [read post]
1 Dec 2016, 4:51 am
I’ll repeat what I said a earlier this year when the 7th Circuit announced its original decision: On this issue, ignore Title VII, ignore the EEOC, and ignore the courts, and just do what is right. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 4:54 am
Title VII does need to be amended to grant accommodation rights to pregnant women. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 6:23 pm
In Doe v. [read post]
29 Jan 2019, 6:21 am
"This whole issue of whether Title VII applies to sexual orientation appears to be reaching a decision point. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 9:05 pm
My new post at Cato covers the Supreme Court’s decision to resolve three cases in which it is argued that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act bans private workplace discrimination against gay and transgender employees. [read post]
12 Mar 2017, 12:36 pm
I respectfully disagree. [read post]
8 Aug 2016, 6:44 am
The post Seventh Circuit: Title VII Does Not Cover Sexual Orientation Bias appeared first on Health Employment And Labor. [read post]
