Discrimination

Expert Analysis

• Remote Work Rulings Show ADA Fights Hinge On Process

  

  Two opposite outcomes in recent Fifth Circuit and D.C. federal court cases underscore that the legality of denying employees' disability accommodation requests for remote work depends less on broad policy and more on how it's applied, says Paul Sweeney at Ice Miller.

• How Justices' TPS Ruling Affects Workforce Planning

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent holding in Mullin v. Doe that courts lack jurisdiction to review temporary protected status determinations greenlights the end of TPS for thousands of Syrian and Haitian nationals, and means employers must reevaluate TPS-designees' employability while avoiding discriminatory document practices, says attorney Richard Herman.

• What To Know Before Justices Rule In Title IX Employee Case

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to decide whether Title IX protections extend to employees alleging sex discrimination in Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, which could have significant implications for higher education institutions and their employees, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

• Pregnancy Bias Suits Highlight EEOC's Expanding Reach

  

  Recent U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission suits show that enactment of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act has drawn scrutiny to a wider range of employment decisions and an increasing focus on individual decisions as indicators of whether an employer's policies comply with evolving federal requirements, say attorneys at Krevolin Horst.

• Lessons From EEOC Suit Over Coca-Cola Women-Only Event

  

  The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's recent lawsuit alleging that Coca-Cola Northeast violated federal law by having a professional development retreat for female employees demonstrates that the EEOC is scrutinizing DEI-related practices with unprecedented intensity, so even the most well-intentioned programs may be challenged, say attorneys at Venable.

• NY Defamation Carveout Hinges On Causation, Not Labels

  

  A New York federal court's decisions in two cases involving tortious interference claims, and the recent Second Circuit ruling in Satanic Temple v. Newsweek Digital, highlight that the dispositive question for alleged defamation is whether injury flows through reputation or through direct interference with a relationship, says attorney Andrea Natale.

• DOL Deal Offers FMLA Lesson On Handling Intermittent Leave

  

  The U.S. Department of Labor's recent deal with the University of Tennessee paying an employee over $30,000 for alleged violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act offers lessons about responding to intermittent leave requests, avoiding forced resignations and providing required notices, says Jason Knott at Zuckerman Spaeder.

• Flashpoints In Focus: Handling Religious Objections To AI Use

  

  Pope Leo XIV's recent warning about artificial intelligence may increase requests for religious exemptions from workplace AI use, so employers must be prepared to understand the request's scope, determine whether the employee has a religious conflict and distinguish reasonable accommodations from undue hardship, say attorneys at Seyfarth.

• Constructing AI Compliance Plans As State Laws Diverge

  

  With Colorado, Connecticut and the federal government recently announcing wildly different approaches to artificial intelligence regulation, creating a workable compliance program means addressing overlapping obligations using shared systems rather than separate silos, say attorneys at Ogletree.

• Why Private Sector Should Watch Gov't DEI Firing Class Bid

  

  Former federal employees' class certification attempt in Fell v. Trump is worth following, as their challenge of the Office of Personnel Management's elimination of DEI positions raises questions about commonality in employee classes and protections for nonminority advocacy that reach beyond the public sector, says Shaun Southworth at Southworth PC.

• 4 Emerging Limits Of Employer Mental Health Notice Defense

  

  A California appeals court's recent decision in Husband v. Target, addressing when an employer knows about an employee's undisclosed disability, leaves open questions about how changes in mental health awareness and workforce monitoring tools may raise the bar for what employers can claim not to know, says Benjamin Heller at RFZ Law.

• Vax Ruling Offers Employer Tips For Handling Political Speech

  

  A California appeals court's recent decision in Rademacher v. ABC, rejecting a "General Hospital" actor's suit alleging he was terminated for opposing a vaccine policy, demonstrates the importance of the employer's process, including neutral policies, documentation, and evidence of who knew what and when, say attorneys at Krevolin Horst.

• What Colorado AI Law's Major Rewrite Means For Employers

  

  Colorado's landmark law regulating employers' use of artificial intelligence tools was recently replaced with a narrower regime that eliminates many burdensome obligations, but still imposes a host of requirements focused on transparency and accountability, say attorneys at Proskauer.