Add to ORKGAbrams delineates the arguments both for and against interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964's protection from sex-based discrimination in the workplace to include sexual orientation as well. Drawing on precedent established in several landmark LGBTQ+ cases, Abrams sheds light on the inconsistency of judicial rulings regarding this issue. While her essay thoroughly explores the incentives and ramifications for the Court to proection against sexual orientation discrimination in the pending SCOTUS cases of Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, Abrams ultimately argues that there is no replacement for the legislative branch's direct and unambigious modification of Title VII
This article is a comprehensive review of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, more specifically, Title VII...
Bostock held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964\u27s proscription against sex discrimina...
The United States Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Altitude Express v. Zarda, a case t...
When most people think of employment discrimination, the first thing that comes to mind is discrimin...
Should Title VII allow employers to invoke a “love the sin, hate the sinner” defense to escape liabi...
Many Americans currently believe that federal law prohibits discrimination because of sexual orienta...
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 expressly prohibits employment discrimination on the basis...
In the wake of marriage equality, LGBT claims to employment rights have taken center stage in the st...
More than thirty years ago, LGBT employees acrossthe United States sought relief from discrimination...
In Bostock v. Clayton County the Supreme Court held that the Title VII ban on employment discriminat...
In October of 2019, the Supreme Court heard the arguments of two cases presenting the same inquiry: ...
On July 18, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held, in Bostock v. Clayton County Board of ...
Under current federal law, a majority of jurisdictions decline to extend Title VII protections based...
Until relatively recently federal courts have held that claims of discrimination based in sexual ori...
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is supposed to provide equal employment opportunities to a...
This article is a comprehensive review of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, more specifically, Title VII...
Bostock held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964\u27s proscription against sex discrimina...
The United States Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Altitude Express v. Zarda, a case t...
When most people think of employment discrimination, the first thing that comes to mind is discrimin...
Should Title VII allow employers to invoke a “love the sin, hate the sinner” defense to escape liabi...
Many Americans currently believe that federal law prohibits discrimination because of sexual orienta...
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 expressly prohibits employment discrimination on the basis...
In the wake of marriage equality, LGBT claims to employment rights have taken center stage in the st...
More than thirty years ago, LGBT employees acrossthe United States sought relief from discrimination...
In Bostock v. Clayton County the Supreme Court held that the Title VII ban on employment discriminat...
In October of 2019, the Supreme Court heard the arguments of two cases presenting the same inquiry: ...
On July 18, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held, in Bostock v. Clayton County Board of ...
Under current federal law, a majority of jurisdictions decline to extend Title VII protections based...
Until relatively recently federal courts have held that claims of discrimination based in sexual ori...
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is supposed to provide equal employment opportunities to a...
This article is a comprehensive review of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, more specifically, Title VII...
Bostock held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964\u27s proscription against sex discrimina...
The United States Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Altitude Express v. Zarda, a case t...