The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit case involving EEO-1 reports and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has taken another procedural turn. The court’s July 2025 decision in Center for Investigative Reporting v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor upheld the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s finding that workforce composition… Continue Reading…
Articles Discussing Title VII Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964.
The “Disparate” Dilemma in Employment Discrimination Litigation
Employers shouldn’t overly rely on reports that the EEOC is no longer interested in disparate impact: Private lawsuits or other entities bringing such claims, both in the traditional discrimination and the emerging “illegal DEI” contexts, still pose legal threats. In this episode, our attorneys discuss disparate impact versus treatment, “job-relatedness” defenses, the role of statistics and the value of privileged disparate impact analyses, and the need for employer vigilance given the ongoing financial and reputational risks associated with disparate impact claims.
Justice Department Erases Disparate Impact Liability From Title VI Enforcement Regulations
On December 10, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a final rule removing liability for disparate impact discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This rule applies to recipients of federal funding, including state and local government agencies, nonprofits, schools, and government contractors.
The Rise of Retaliation Claims: What’s Driving Them and How to Respond Workplace Wake-Up with Jen Shaw
Retaliation claims now top the EEOC’s charge list, and California employers are no exception. Why are these claims on the rise, and what everyday employer…
AI at Work: Who’s Liable When the Algorithm Discriminates? Workplace Wake-Up with Jen Shaw
Artificial intelligence is everywhere—from resume screening to productivity tracking—but what happens when the tech gets it wrong? In this episode, Jen dives…
Reassigned … and Ready to Sue? Fourth Circuit Ruling May Open the Door to More Discrimination Claims by Employees
Following the Supreme Court of the United States’ April 2024 ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, employers have grappled with determining what constitutes an adverse employment action that will support a claim under federal antidiscrimination laws. A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth
EntertainHR: What Love Island USA Teaches Us About Handling Discriminatory Language in the Workplace
“Yulissa has left the villa.”
Two episodes into Season 7 of the Peacock dating series Love Island USA, contestant Yulissa Escobar was abruptly removed after podcast clips resurfaced of her using a racial slur.
Later in the season, contestant Cierra Ortega was similarly removed for what the series described as
EEOC to Halt Investigations into Disparate Impact Claims
TakeawaysAn internal EEOC memo reportedly directs the agency to discharge all disparate impact discrimination claims.The directive furthers an executive order issued by the president earlier this year.The policy is a significant departure from the EEOC’s previous enforcement strategies and may have the effect of allowing parties alleging disparate impact claims to bypass the administrative process under federal law.Related link
EEOC to Close Investigations of Disparate Impact Discrimination
EEOC to Close Investigations of Disparate Impact Discrimination
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission will close almost all pending charges based solely on allegations of disparate impact discrimination by September 30, 2025, according to an internal memorandum obtained by Bloomberg Law. The agency is expected to issue right-to-sue letters to
Can an employee sue for discrimination after being placed on a Performance Plan?
Can an employee sue for discrimination after being placed on a Performance Plan?
We are about to put an employee on a Performance Improvement Plan. Can they sue us for employment discrimination?
Many employers use Performance Improvement Plans, or “PIPs,” as a way to provide clear guidance and direction to employees.
The Rise of Retaliation Claims: What’s Driving Them and How to Respond – Workplace Wake-Up with Jen Shaw
Retaliation claims now top the EEOC’s charge list, and California employers are no exception. Why are these claims on the rise, and what everyday employer decisions trigger risk? Jen explains the trends, the traps, and the tools HR needs to prevent retaliation while still enforcing accountability.
Gender-Affirming Care Exclusions and Title VII
A federal court in Georgia recently held that a self-funded plan’s exclusion for gender-affirming surgery violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This decision is likely to have far-reaching effects on fully insured and self-insured plans. While there is no black-letter-law requiring health plans to cover gender affirming/sex change surgery, a ruling such as this from a federal appeals court could effectively requires plans to cover these benefits – lest they run afoul of Title VII and open themselves up to potential liability.
Ninth Circuit Orders Disclosure of Federal Contractors’ 2016–2020 Consolidated EEO-1 Data
In a ruling significant to federal contractors and government transparency advocates alike, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has affirmed a district court order requiring the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to disclose thousands of EEO-1 Type 2 (consolidated) reports submitted by federal contractors, rejecting the agency’s
WEBINAR: Avoiding Trial: How Employers Can Position Employment Claims for Early Dismissal
Summary judgment is where many employment cases are resolved and where a strong record can mean the difference between dismissal and costly litigation. This session looks at how the decisions employers make during real-time issues — managing performance, documenting concerns, responding to complaints — can shape the legal strategy months down the line. We’ll talk about how courts evaluate records, what makes a case suitable for early dismissal, and how working closely with counsel from the outset can drive better, more efficient outcomes when litigation hits.
Supreme Court: Plaintiffs Claiming Reverse Discrimination Not Required to Meet Heightened Evidentiary Burden
In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a disagreement between circuit courts over the burden of proof required by a plaintiff from a majority group alleging discrimination under Title VII