North America

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits covered employers from discriminating against applicants, as well as current and former employees, based on race, gender, color, religion, or national origin. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 amended Title VII to include a prohibition of discrimination based on pregnancy in its prohibition of gender discrimination. The Act prohibits discrimination based on current, past, or potential pregnancy.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits covered employers from discriminating against applicants, as well as current and former employees, based on race, gender, color, religion, or national origin. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 (PDA) amended Title VII to include in its prohibition of gender discrimination a prohibition of discrimination based on pregnancy, which includes abortion and the use of contraception.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits covered employers from discriminating against applicants, as well as current and former employees, based on certain characteristics, including race, gender, color, religion, or national origin.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits covered employers from discriminating against applicants, as well as current and former employees, based on race, gender, color, religion, or national origin. In Bostock v. Clayton County, the court interpreted Title VII’s prohibition on gender discrimination in the workplace as including a prohibition on discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Ms. Erdogu, a Turkish national, fled to Canada and filed a claim for refugee protection to escape persecution for her political and religious activity in Turkey. Because she was both an ethnic and religious minority (Kurdish/Alevi), she was arrested in Turkey on a number of occasions, during which she was detained, interrogated, beaten, and sexually molested. Further, she claimed to be at risk because a violent ex-boyfriend had informed her father of the former couple’s sexual relationship, leading her father to declare his intent to kill her in order to preserve the family’s honor. Ms.

Ms. Ericson and Ms. Kornechuk brought an action against Syracuse University and its employees under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. section 1681 (“Title IX”) and the Violence Against Women Act, 42 U.S.C. section 13981 (“VAWA”). Plaintiffs alleged that they were sexually harassed by their tennis coach, and that the University was aware of the tennis coach’s behavior and conducted a sham investigatory proceeding to conceal the extent of the tennis coach’s misconduct, which had occurred for more than twenty years. Defendants moved to dismiss the claims.

Plaintiff, the Eternal World TV Network—a Catholic network with 350 employees—was required to provide health insurance for its employees, which would include coverage for contraceptives, under the Affordable Care Act. Plaintiff contended that using or providing contraceptives violated a deeply-held tenant of its belief system and that the accommodation provided to religious nonprofit organizations under the Affordable Care Act still amounted to government coercion to change its beliefs.

Although plaintiff had satisfactorily completed her firefighter-training year and had been highly recommended for advancement, she was found to have allegedly failed five final task tests and her employment was terminated shortly thereafter.

In Ex parte Alabama Department of Youth Services, 880 So. 2d 393 (Ala. 2003), the Supreme Court of Alabama addressed claims brought by two female minors, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, who alleged they were sexually harassed and abused while in the custody of the Department of Youth Services (DYS).

In Ex parte State ex rel. Alabama Policy Institute, 200 So. 3d 495 (Ala. 2015), the Supreme Court of Alabama intervened in the state’s handling of same-sex marriage following federal district court rulings striking down Alabama’s marriage ban.