SCOTUS Trio: Does Title VII “Sex” Discrimination Include “Sexual Orientation” and “Gender Identity”?

The U.S. Supreme Court recently accepted a trio of cases addressing whether Title VII’s prohibition of “sex” discrimination in employment contexts should focus on biological male and female distinctions, or if it should be expanded and redefined to cover “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.” Lower federal courts have split on these issues. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has favored such expansiveness, while the Trump administration is opposed. Against the backdrop of our prior articles on related employment discrimination litigation, this article highlights the tension between the judiciary and legislative government branches as well as significant religious liberty interests at stake.

The Silver Lining of the Dissent in Americans for Prosperity Foundation's Denial of Rehearing "En Banc"

Can controversial groups expect government protection from mandatory disclosures of their participants? Not as the Americans for Prosperity Foundation has painfully learned in California. APF suffered yet another court setback in the federal appellate Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent denial of an en banc (full court) rehearing. APF has fought the California Attorney General’s mandatory donor disclosures in annual filings, citing First Amendment freedom of speech, association rights, and related concerns for donors’ privacy and protection from harassment.