By Benjamin ConleyEmily MillerLeon RodriguezSam Schwartz-Fenwick, and Cameron Smith

Seyfarth Synopsis: For decades, courts and practitioners have struggled with whether federal law protects employees against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Today, in a landmark 6-3 decision authored by Justice Gorsuch, the Supreme Court held that Title VII
Continue Reading Supreme Court Holds that Title VII Prohibits Discrimination Based On Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

In the second periodic installment of the Employment Law Lookout Blog Team’s analysis of employment law (and related) case being heard by the United States Supreme Court this term, read on for our take on Spokeo Inv. v. Robins.

Plaintiffs Without Injuries?  SCOTUS To Hear Arguments Whether
Plaintiffs Need to Show Concrete Harm To Establish
Injury-in-Fact for Article III Standing

Continue Reading ELL SCOTUS SERIES: # 2 – Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins

As the Supreme Court of the United States begins their October 2015 term, the Employment Law Lookout Blog Team wanted to provide our readers with a preview (and then later a “post-view”) of the several cases being heard by the “Supremes” that will likely have an impact on the world of employment law.   Installment 1, Green v. Brennan, is
Continue Reading ELL SCOTUS SERIES: # 1 – Green v. Brennan

By: Dawn Reddy Solowey and Ariel Cudkowicz

On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., a closely-watched religious discrimination case that we’ve blogged about before.

The EEOC’s petition for certiorari framed the legal question this way: “Whether an employer can be liable under Title VII for refusing
Continue Reading A “Real Administrative Rat Mess” (or Takeaways from SCOTUS Oral Arguments in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch)

By Dawn Reddy Solowey  and Lynn Kappelman

On October 2, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to weigh in on the long-running litigation between EEOC and Abercrombie & Fitch over the retailer’s decision not to hire a Muslim teenager who interviewed for a position in a headscarf that violated its “Look” policy.

The Court’s much-anticipated decision may clarify when an
Continue Reading What Does The Employer Know, And When Does It Know It? SCOTUS Grants Cert In EEOC V. Abercrombie Religious Discrimination Suit

By Linda Schoonmaker and Ada Dolph

On March 5, 2014, we issued a Client Alert that the Supreme Court had issued its decision in Lawson v. FMR LLC, 134 S.Ct. 1158 (2014), greatly expanding the scope of the whistleblower protections in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) to encompass any employee of private companies that contract to perform
Continue Reading Next Steps after the Supreme Court’s Expansion of SOX Whistleblower Protections to Private Companies That Contract to Perform Work with Public Companies

By: Sara Eber

Following a term with many employment-related decisions—and with outcomes emphatically pro-employer—the United States Supreme Court will hear the first oral arguments of its 2013-2014 term, which are currently scheduled to begin on October 7, 2013. 

The docket will again feature several cases with significant implications for employers, including issues affecting the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the
Continue Reading Continuing the Pro-Employer Trend? What to Watch In the Supreme Court’s 2013/2014 Term

By: Taron Murakami

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, striking the Defense of Marriage Act’s (“DOMA”) definition of marriage as unconstitutional, affects an employee’s entitlement to leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) — and employers in states that do not recognize same sex marriage still need to pay attention.

Continue Reading After Windsor, Expanded Rights for LGBT Employees Under the FMLA