Weekly litigation update — September 17, 2016

First Amendment challenge to ban on automobile “For Sale” signs EEOC gets a haircut Petition for rehearing denied in Florida takings case Amicus brief filed in support of right to earn a living First Amendment challenge to ban on automobile … Continue reading

EEOC loses its hairstyle discrimination case

Earlier today, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s lawsuit against Catastrophe Management Solutions. This an important decision concerning the proper scope of Title VII. At issue was whether a business’s policy requiring professional-looking … Continue reading

Why hairstyle requirements don’t violate Title VII in one sentence

In EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, Inc., the federal government is claiming that a business’s decision to ban dreadlocks in the workplace violates Title VII’s requirement that the workplace be free of racial discrimination. Briefing was completed long ago, and PLF … Continue reading

EEOC suffers minor setback

Today’s Supreme Court decision in Mach Mining, LLC v Equal Employment Opportunity Commission appears to be another minor setback for the EEOC. The EEOC has a statutory duty under Title VII to attempt to eliminate a violation by informal means before it … Continue reading

Requiring professional-looking haircuts is not racial discrimination

Think about the following scenario.  A job seeker sees an ad for a sales job.  She has all the correct qualifications.  Her interview goes great.  The business says they want to hire her, but because she will be selling the … Continue reading

Victory in EEOC v. Freeman; strong rebuke for the EEOC

This morning the Fourth Circuit rejected the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s latest attempt to expand disparate impact law.  In EEOC v. Freeman, the government brought suit against a company that ran employee applicants through criminal background checks before hiring them. The EEOC alleged that … Continue reading

EEOC: disparate impact for thee, but not for me

Yesterday the Sixth Circuit shut down the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s suit against Kaplan University in EEOC v. Kaplan.  EEOC had alleged that Kaplan’s policy of conducting credit checks on job applicants had a disparate impact on minorities.  Perhaps EEOC … Continue reading

“An egregious example of scientific dishonesty”

Back in August I reported on a case out of the federal district court in Maryland, where the EEOC was trying to stop a business from undertaking criminal background checks on job-applicants.  In EEOC v. Freeman, the district court rejected … Continue reading

Study shows EEOC’s disparate impact cure is worse than the disease

A group of congressmen have introduced a bill that would ban employers from considering job applicants’ credit histories.  As we’ve noted before, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has proscesuted companies’ for using credit and background checks due to the practices’ purported … Continue reading

PLF argues government can’t judge individuals based on the color of their skin

Today Pacific Legal Foundation filed this amicus brief in EEOC v. Kaplan, which was joined by the Cato Institute, the Center for Equal Opportunity, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Project 21.  EEOC has been particularly aggressive in pursuing disparate impact … Continue reading