CruzLines
A legal blog offering excursions into the Constitution, equality law, sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation.
Take That
27 May 2008
The Supreme Court of the U.S. today interpreted two federal civil rights laws to protect workers from retaliation for complaining about prohibited discrimination. In CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, the Court held that a post-Civil War era law, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides that "[a]ll persons ... shall have the same right ... to make and enforce contracts ... as is enjoyed by white citizens," allowed former Cracker Barrel assistant manager to sue not only for his own allegedly racially motivated firing but also for alleged retaliation because he had complained about racially discriminatory treatment of a co-worker. In Gomez-Perez v. Potter, the Court held that the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act allowed a postal worker to sue for alleged retaliation against her after she filed an administrative ADEA complaint. In both cases Justices Scalia and Thomas dissented, and Chief Justice Roberts dissented as well in Gomez-Perez.Posted by Cruz at 12:53 PM | Link | 0 comments
Categories: U.S. Supreme Court race discrimination age discrimination
Professor David Cruz is a constitutional law expert focusing on civil rights and equality issues, including equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.
Categories
- California Marriage Equality Act (1)
- California Supreme Court (12)
- European Convention on Human Rights (2)
- free speech (1)
- gender identity (3)
- human rights (4)
- India (1)
- intersex (1)
- LGBT right (1)
- LGBTI rights (2)
- products liability (1)
- public forum (1)
- Section 5 (1)
- sexual orientation (6)
- sovereign immunity (1)
- strip search (1)
- substantive due process (1)
- Ten Commandments (1)
- United Nations (1)
- Williams Institute (1)
- Yogyakarta Principles (1)
- age discrimination (1)
- Barack Obama (1)
- boycotts (1)
- California Constitution (3)
- California Supreme Court (5)
- conferences (1)
- Connecticut Supreme Court (1)
- Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (4)
- District of Columbia (3)
- domestic partnership (4)
- Don't Ask Don't Tell (1)
- Eighth Amendment (2)
- employment discrimination (2)
- equal protection (9)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- House of Lords (1)
- Iowa Supreme Court (1)
- Japan (1)
- Maine (3)
- marriage (38)
- marriage recognition (10)
- New Hampshire (1)
- New York (1)
- Portugal (1)
- preemption (1)
- Prop 8 (24)
- public opinion (3)
- race discrimination (1)
- rape (2)
- respect for private life (2)
- sex (2)
- sexual orientation discrimination (3)
- sodomy (1)
- statutory rape (1)
- Sweden (1)
- U.S. Supreme Court (7)
- Vermont (1)
Archives
- November 2009 (1)
- October 2009 (2)
- September 2009 (1)
- August 2009 (1)
- July 2009 (2)
- June 2009 (1)
- May 2009 (5)
- April 2009 (5)
- March 2009 (6)
- February 2009 (3)
- January 2009 (1)
- December 2008 (3)
- November 2008 (3)
- October 2008 (5)
- August 2008 (2)
- July 2008 (3)
- June 2008 (5)
- May 2008 (7)
- March 2008 (1)
- February 2008 (1)
