Human Rights

Supreme Court rules that Title VII EEOC filing requirements are mandatory but not jurisdictional

Supreme Court of the United States

The Supreme Court issued a ruling on June 3, 2019, in a case (Fort Bend County v. Davis)  involving whether a court may hear a discrimination case where the plaintiff fails to raise all charges in an initial EEOC complaint.  The Court found that the Title VII’s rules are procedural, not jurisdictional, and as such procedural defenses need to be raised early in a case.

 
 

In Congress, Federal Equality Act as drafted faces feminist opposition

In Congress, Federal Equality Act as drafted faces feminist opposition

Legislation that would add sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 threatens women's bodily privacy says feminist organization

 
 

Vatican calls for religious freedom amidst competing strains of secularism and fundamentalism

The Little Sisters of The Poor rally outside the Supreme Court in Washington, DC March 23, 2016.  -  American Life League - Creative Commons license

The Vatican has released a document, “Religious Liberty for the Good of All,” calling for an expansion of religious liberty in the face of competing strains of religious fundamentalism and secular intolerance. While not addressing each and every conflict, the document is intended to express the relationship between civil law and religious law in the context of theology, anthropology, and political science.

 
 

Justices hint interest in revisiting Title VII religious accommodation while declining to hear football coach prayer case

Justices hint interest in revisiting Title VII religious accommodation while declining to hear football coach prayer case

It is debatable whether a claim by a public school football coach that he is compelled by religious belief to pray at the 50-yard line following each game is a good vehicle for addressing either free exercise or workplace religious accommodation. However, it does appear that the four justices who signed onto Alito's response have concerns about the chilling effect of Hardison and Smith on the ability to even raise Title VII religious accommodation and Free Exercise Clause claims. With Patterson v. Walgreen Co., the Supreme Court has the opportunity to revisit religious accommodation claims under Title VII.

 
 

Turning Back the Clock: The Plot to Dismantle the Establishment Clause

Turning Back the Clock: The Plot to Dismantle the Establishment Clause

Over the last few decades, a religious movement has gained widespread political power with the stated intent of turning back the clock by dismantling the Establishment Clause, which requires separation of church and state.

 
 

California lawmaker withdraws bill that would criminalize religion-based "gay conversion therapy"

California lawmaker withdraws bill that would criminalize religion-based "gay conversion therapy"

Earlier today, California Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell) withdrew a bill that would have outlaws the sale of any service, including certain forms of advertising, that were intended to change an individual's sexuality or gender identity. Assembly Bill 2943 had already passed the Assembly and Senate and was one vote away from the governor's desk.

 
 

John McCain: "No Freedom without Freedom of Religion"

John McCain: "No Freedom without Freedom of Religion"

"Choosing one’s faith is the most personal of choices, a matter of individual conscience. That is why we cherish it as part of our Bill of Rights. That is why Franklin Roosevelt listed as one of his four freedoms the right of everyone to worship God in his own way, everywhere in the world. And that is why people fleeing religious persecution continue to find safety in our country. All people must be free to worship as they please, or not to worship at all. It is a simple truth: There is no freedom without the freedom of religion."

 
 

Supreme Court rules against state-mandated speech

Supreme Court rules against state-mandated speech

When one person’s opinions can reach the world in a matter of seconds on the Internet, the ability to speak freely is undergoing tremendous growing pains. These decisions show the Court still recognizes the rights to free speech and belief. The First Amendment remains alive and well for the time being.

 
 

Supreme Court: Religious animus irrelevant in Trump travel ban case

Supreme Court: Religious animus irrelevant in Trump travel ban case

The Supreme Court rules that the President of the United States has broad discretion to impose travel restrictions, so long as they are related to a plausible governmental interest, and that a showing of Presidential animus toward a religious minority is not relevant to the analysis. 

 
 

Who really won the wedding cake case?

Who really won the wedding cake case?

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court surprised a lot of us and issued a ruling in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case that not only avoided making a real decision, but avoided it with great style.