Tag: Civil Rights Act of 1964

Categories
Title VII

Religious Rights in the Workplace: E.E.O.C. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.

This post is the next in our series regarding recent cases from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Samantha Elauf is a practicing Muslim who wore a headscarf to her interview with Abercrombie & Fitch (“Abercrombie”). While she received a rating that qualified her to be hired, she was ultimately denied the position because her headscarf would violate Abercrombie’s “Look Policy,” which prohibited employees from wearing “caps.” Subsequently, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), acting on Elauf’s behalf, filed suit against Abercrombie, alleging a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits a prospective employer from refusing to hire an applicant because of the applicant’s religious practice when the practice could be accommodated without undue hardship. The lower court ruled for Abercrombie, holding that an employer could not be liable under Title VII unless the applicant provided the employer with actual knowledge of the need for an accommodation.

The question before the Supreme Court was whether the Title VII prohibition applies only when the applicant has informed the employer of his need for an accommodation. The Court reversed the lower court, holding that a job applicant seeking to prove a Title VII disparate treatment claim need only show that the need for religious accommodation was a motivating factor in the prospective employer’s adverse decision, and thus, they need not show that the employer actually knew that the applicant’s practice was a religious practice that required an accommodation. The Court went even further explaining that Title VII doesn’t just require the employers to be neutral when it comes to religious practices, but goes beyond that by giving religious practices “favored treatment,” which means that policies which would otherwise be neutral must “give way to the need for an accommodation” of an applicant’s religious practices.

This case is significant because, to date, it is one of the strongest statements from the Court on Title VII protections for religious discrimination, and as such, is a major victory for religious rights in the workplace.

 

 

 

Categories
Uncategorized

REMEMBERING JUDGE JOHN MINOR WISDOM

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  From time to time this year, we’ll post an entry on this blog about heroes who transformed civil rights law generally and employment law specifically.  Today, we’ll take a moment to remember a giant in the legal profession, the late Judge John Minor Wisdom.

This month would have been the 109th birthday of the legendary Judge Wisdom, who sat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit during the struggles of segregation.

Judge Wisdom, a Tulane Law graduate, was perhaps the jurist most responsible for forcing the South — kicking and screaming — to relegate segregation to the ash heap of history.  Judge Wisdom wrote the opinion that forced Ole Miss to integrate.  He managed the cases that implemented Brown v. Board of Education.  He handed down many of the employment law cases that exposed the racial animus of the Deep South from the 1960s until his death in 1999.

At the time of his death, Xavier University President Norman Francis said, “John Minor was a major force in saving the South.  We were a divided house on the verge of civil dissent.”  Despite death threats and being ostracized in his home state of Louisiana, he was willing to take unpopular positions in the most important cases of his day.  Consequently, Judge Wisdom forged a more just society in his native South.

Categories
Uncategorized

Donald Sterling, the Tennessee Legislature, and Civil Rights Laws

This year, 2014, should be a celebration of civil rights law. Fifty years ago the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. In my view, it was the most important piece of  legislation of the 20th century. In the streets of Birmingham and in the backwoods of Mississippi, people literally died in order to see equal protection extended to all persons. That was a half century ago. The year 2014 should be a glorious celebration of those accomplishments. Instead, recent events have highlighted how far we have to go.

Unless you have been hiding under a rock, you are aware of the statements that Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling made. I will not repeat them here. They don’t merit being repeated. Needless to say, they were despicable. They disparage African Americans, and all minorities, in a way that we do not tolerate in the United States. Unfortunately, such cognitive bias is not as rare as we would like to think. It is everywhere. United State Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy once observed:

Prejudice, we are beginning to understand, rises not from malice or hostile animus alone. It may result as well from insensitivity caused by simple want of careful, rational reflection or from some instinctive mechanism to guard against people who appear to be different in some respects from ourselves.

At home in Tennessee, I wish I could report that we are doing better. Unfortunately, on the 50th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the Tennessee General Assembly took a step backwards. Instead of strengthening our civil rights laws, the Tennessee General Assembly recently passed a bill that significantly weakens civil rights protections in Tennessee. The legislation did away with certain remedies available to victims of civil rights abuses, and limited the amount of money they could receive in a draconian manner. For instance, under the current legislation, a victim of a rape in the work place could be limited to $25,000 in compensation in some instances.

In fifty years, we have made a lot of progress. Unfortunately, we still have a long way to go.