Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: August 11, 2015
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe ruling comes on the heels of the Supreme Court’s historic decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.
Now that same-sex couples have won the right to marry, comprehensive sexual orientation employment discrimination laws are widely considered to be the next big legal hurdle. As we have previously discussed on this blog, studies show that more than 40 percent of lesbian, gay, and bisexual workers have suffered sexual orientation employment discrimination.
The EEOC’s groundbreaking employment ruling arose in a sexual orientation employment discrimination claim brought by an air traffic control specialist against Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. By a vote of 3-2, the EEOC Commission concluded that sexual orientation employment discrimination constitutes discrimination for the purposes of Title VII even though it is not expressly listed as a prohibited basis for employment actions.
“Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is premised on sex-based preferences, assumptions, expectations, stereotypes, or norms,” the EEOC’s ruling explained. “‘Sexual orientation’ as a concept cannot be defined or understood without reference to sex. … It follows, then, that sexual orientation is inseparable from and inescapably linked to sex and, therefore, that allegations of sexual orientation discrimination involves sex-based considerations.”
While certainly monumental, the EEOC interpretation of Title VII is not binding on the federal courts. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would expressly ban LGBT discrimination in the workplace, has been pending in Congress for several years. However, it has failed to gain momentum, even in the wake of the Obergefell decision.
For employers, the EEOC’s ruling on sexual orientation employment discrimination should not be taken lightly. Even though the courts have not yet sanctioned it, the agency is likely to aggressively enforce its new interpretation. Also, as a reminder, any discrimination and/or retaliation against LGBT workers in New Jersey could give rise to liability under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, which includes both “affectional or sexual orientation” and “gender identity and expression” as protected classes.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!