Court: U.S. Supreme Court

by

On January 23, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court held (in U.S. v. Jones; decision below) that the government’s “installation of a GPS device on a target’s vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movements, constitutes a ‘search’” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Central to the Court’s analysis and conclusion…

Read More Supreme Court Holds That Affixing GPS Tracking Device to a Car Constitutes a Fourth Amendment “Search”
Share This:
by

Last Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court (scroll down for decision) explored the interaction between the laws prohibiting employment discrimination (here, the ADA), on the one hand, and the First Amendment’s command that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”, on the other. The Supreme Court Recognizes…

Read More Supreme Court Recognizes “Ministerial Exception” to Anti-Discrimination Laws
Share This:
by

In Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 131 S.Ct. 1186 (2011), (slip opinion here), the Supreme Court clarified the circumstances – under the Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), 38 U.S.C. 4311 – under which an employer may be held liable for employment discrimination based on the discriminatory animus of an employee who influenced, but did not…

Read More U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies “Cat’s Paw” Liability Theory
Share This:
by

In Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., 131 S.Ct. 1325 (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) anti-retaliation provision does not require the submission of a written complaint. That provision, codified at 29 U.S.C. 215(a)(3), makes it unlawful to, inter alia, “discharge or in any other manner discriminate against any employee…

Read More FLSA Anti-Retaliation Provision Covers Oral, as Well as Written, Complaints
Share This:
by

On January 24, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court (in an opinion authored by Justice Scalia) unanimously held that an employee (Eric Thompson), who was fired after his fiancee Miriam Regalado filed an EEOC charge alleging sex discrimination, could assert a claim for retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.…

Read More Supreme Court Permits Fired Fiance to Maintain Title VII Retaliation Suit
Share This: