Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: February 13, 2013
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comAmerican Idol is making headlines this season, for all of the wrong reasons. Following reports of infighting among the judges, several former contestants are now seeking to file a discrimination lawsuit.
The contestants, who span several seasons, allege that the producers of American Idol have unfairly discriminated against African American contestants by inquiring about arrest records and using them as grounds for disqualification.
According to a letter sent to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Idol producers have “never once publicly disqualified a white or non-black American Idol contestant in the history of the eleven season production.” It further states that the contestants were not convicted of the crimes at the time they auditioned, “Yet their personal and professional lives remain permanently and severely impaired by [the show’s] continuing violations of our nation’s laws.”
In addition to the fact that three African-Americans—Ruben Studdard, Fantasia Barrino and Jordin Sparks—have been crowned American Idols, the lawsuit faces an uphill battle for several reasons. For instance, in order to benefit from the California laws banning racial discrimination and making it illegal to inquire about arrest records, the contestants must show that they are indeed employees. Although the classification has not been rigorously tested in the court system, reality television producers generally treat participants on their programs as independent contractors.
Additionally, courts have also traditionally provided producers with wide latitude when it comes to casting decisions. As we previously discussed on the Scarinci Hollenbeck Sports and Entertainment Blog, African American contestants filed a similar lawsuit alleging racial discrimination was behind the shows’ failure to feature a Bachelor or a Bachelorette of color. Although the legal theory differed, the court ultimately found that the First Amendment does protect casting decisions by ABC and The Bachelor’s producers.
“Regulating the casting process necessarily regulates the end product. In this respect, casting and the resulting work of entertainment are inseparable and must both be protected to ensure that the producers’ freedom of speech is not abridged,” the ruling said.
Will this suit still be standing after the votes are cast? We shall see.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Michael Cifelli, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) remain a critical tool for protecting sensitive business information. However, New York NDA requirements have evolved, and businesses must ensure these agreements are carefully drafted to remain enforceable. In a competitive market like New York City, NDAs are commonly used to protect proprietary information, client relationships, and strategic plans. At the same […]
Author: Dan Brecher

How Courts Evaluate Testamentary Capacity and Undue Influence Will contests in New Jersey are difficult to win, given the strong presumption that a properly executed will reflects the testator’s intent. However, challenges based on lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence remain common, particularly where there are concerns about mental capacity or the involvement of […]
Author: Marc J. Comer

Bringing on outside investors can provide the capital and strategic support a business needs to grow. However, raising capital also introduces important legal, financial, and operational considerations. Before bringing on investors, businesses should address key legal issues to reduce risk, streamline investor due diligence, and position the company for long-term success. Early preparation signals that […]
Author: Dan Brecher

How the Updated Law Shapes Retirement and Estate Planning The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 materially reshapes the required minimum distribution (RMD) landscape, extending tax deferral opportunities while accelerating distribution requirements for many beneficiaries. For high-net-worth individuals and families, these changes are not merely technical. They require a reassessment of retirement income strategies, beneficiary planning, […]
Author: Marc J. Comer

Small businesses considering buying commercial property in New Jersey must evaluate a range of legal, financial, and operational factors. While ownership can offer long-term value and control, it also introduces significant risks if not properly structured. This guide outlines key considerations to help New Jersey business owners make informed decisions, minimize legal exposure, and successfully […]
Author: Robert L. Baker, Jr.

On January 28, 2026, staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Divisions of Corporation Finance, Investment Management, and Trading and Markets issued a joint statement clarifying how existing federal securities laws apply to tokenized securities. The SEC’s “Statement on Tokenized Securities” does not establish new law, but it does provide greater clarity on the […]
Author: Dan Brecher
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!