Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States originates from the typical law, and is codified in many state, federal, and regional laws. These laws restrict discrimination based on particular attributes or “protected categories”. The United States Constitution likewise forbids discrimination by federal and state federal governments versus their public employees. Discrimination in the private sector is not straight constrained by the Constitution, however has actually become based on a growing body of federal and state law, including the Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964. Federal law prohibits discrimination in a number of areas, including recruiting, employing, job assessments, promo policies, training, compensation and disciplinary action. State laws frequently extend defense to extra categories or companies.

Under federal employment discrimination law, companies generally can not discriminate against workers on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (consisting of sexual orientation and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] religion, [1] national origin, [1] special needs (physical or mental, including status), [5] [6] age (for workers over 40), [7] military service or affiliation, [8] insolvency or uncollectable bills, [9] hereditary info, [10] and citizenship status (for residents, irreversible locals, momentary homeowners, refugees, and asylees). [11]

List of United States federal discrimination law

Equal Pay Act of 1963
Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964
Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964

Title IX

Constitutional basis

The United States Constitution does not directly resolve employment discrimination, however its restrictions on discrimination by the federal government have actually been held to protect federal civil servant.

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution restrict the power of the federal and state federal governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has an explicit requirement that the federal government does not deny people of “life, liberty, or residential or commercial property”, without due process of the law. It likewise contains an implicit guarantee that the Fourteenth Amendment clearly prohibits states from violating a person’s rights of due procedure and equal security. In the employment context, these Constitutional provisions would restrict the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their work practices by treating staff members, previous employees, or job applicants unequally because of subscription in a group (such as a race or sex). Due process defense needs that federal government staff members have a fair procedural process before they are ended if the termination is associated with a “liberty” (such as the right to free speech) or residential or commercial property interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the clause that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination costs (so they are not unconstitutional under Tenth Amendment) is Section 5 of Fourteenth Amendment.

Employment discrimination or harassment in the economic sector is not unconstitutional because Federal and most State Constitutions do not expressly provide their particular federal government the power to enact civil rights laws that apply to the economic sector. The Federal federal government’s authority to regulate a private organization, consisting of civil rights laws, stems from their power to manage all commerce between the States. Some State Constitutions do specifically afford some defense from public and private employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions just deal with inequitable treatment by the government, including a public employer.

Absent of a provision in a State Constitution, State civil liberties laws that control the private sector are typically Constitutional under the “police powers” doctrine or the power of a State to enact laws designed to safeguard public health, security and morals. All States should stick to the Federal Civil Rights laws, however States might enact civil rights laws that use extra work protection.

For instance, some State civil rights laws provide protection from work discrimination on the basis of political association, although such types of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil rights laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing work discrimination has developed with time.

The Equal Pay Act amended the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1963. It is imposed by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor. [12] The Equal Pay Act restricts companies and unions from paying various earnings based upon sex. It does not restrict other prejudiced practices in working with. It supplies that where workers carry out equivalent work in the corner needing “equivalent skill, effort, and obligation and performed under similar working conditions,” they need to be offered equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act uses to companies participated in some aspect of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s employees if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a substantial amount of interstate commerce. [citation needed]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 forbids discrimination in a lot more elements of the employment relationship. “Title VII produced the Equal Job opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act”. [12] It uses to a lot of companies engaged in interstate commerce with more than 15 workers, labor organizations, and employment companies. Title VII prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or nationwide origin. It makes it prohibited for employers to discriminate based upon safeguarded attributes concerning terms, conditions, and opportunities of employment. Employment firms might not discriminate when employing or referring applicants, and labor organizations are also restricted from basing subscription or union classifications on race, color, faith, sex, or national origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII in 1978, specifying that illegal sex discrimination includes discrimination based upon pregnancy, giving birth, and related medical conditions. [4] A related statute, the Family and Medical Leave Act, sets requirements governing leave for pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions. [13]

Executive Order 11246 in 1965 “prohibits discrimination by federal specialists and subcontractors on account of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin [and] needs affirmative action by federal professionals”. [14]

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and amended in 1978 and 1986, prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The prohibited practices are almost identical to those laid out in Title VII, except that the ADEA safeguards workers in companies with 20 or more workers rather than 15 or more. An employee is safeguarded from discrimination based on age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has actually phased out and forbade obligatory retirement, except for high-powered decision-making positions (that likewise provide big pensions). The ADEA includes explicit standards for adremcareers.com benefit, pension and retirement strategies. [7] Though ADEA is the center of a lot of discussion of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history beginning with the abolishment of “optimal ages of entry into work in 1956” by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 “established a policy versus age discrimination amongst federal contractors”. [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 restricts employment discrimination on the basis of impairment by the federal government, federal specialists with agreements of more than $10,000, and programs getting federal monetary help. [16] It requires affirmative action in addition to non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 requires reasonable accommodation, and Section 508 requires that electronic and details innovation be available to disabled staff members. [16]

The Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972 prohibits discrimination by mine operators against miners who experience “black lung disease” (pneumoconiosis). [17]

The Vietnam Era Readjustment Act of 1974 “requires affirmative action for handicapped and Vietnam era veterans by federal contractors”. [14]

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 prohibits work discrimination on the basis of insolvency or bad financial obligations. [9]

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 prohibits companies with more than 3 staff members from discriminating versus anybody (except an unauthorized immigrant) on the basis of nationwide origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to get rid of inequitable barriers versus certified people with specials needs, people with a record of a special needs, or people who are considered having a special needs. It restricts discrimination based upon genuine or viewed physical or psychological specials needs. It also requires companies to offer affordable accommodations to staff members who need them since of a special needs to look for a task, carry out the vital functions of a task, or delight in the benefits and advantages of employment, unless the company can show that undue hardship will result. There are strict restrictions on when a company can ask disability-related questions or need medical assessments, and all medical details needs to be treated as personal. An impairment is defined under the ADA as a psychological or physical health condition that “substantially restricts one or more significant life activities. ” [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Rights Acts, amended in 1993, make sure all individuals equal rights under the law and outline the damages offered to plaintiffs in actions brought under Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. [19] [20]

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 bars companies from using people’ hereditary details when making hiring, firing, job placement, or promotion choices. [10]

The proposed US Equality Act of 2015 would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual preference or gender identity. [21] As of June 2018 [upgrade], 28 US states do not explicitly include sexual orientation and 29 US states do not clearly consist of gender identity within anti-discrimination statutes.

LGBT employment discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 prohibits work discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. This is incorporated by the law’s restriction of employment discrimination on the basis of sex. Prior to the landmark cases Bostock v. Clayton County and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2020 ), work securities for LGBT individuals were patchwork; several states and regions explicitly restrict harassment and predisposition in work choices on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity, although some only cover public employees. [22] Prior to the Bostock decision, the Equal Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) interpreted Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC’s figured out that transgender workers were protected under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the protection to encompass sexual orientation in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: “Studies reveal that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay people have experienced some form of discrimination and harassment at the workplace. Moreover, a staggering 90 percent of transgender workers report some kind of harassment or mistreatment on the job.” Many individuals in the LGBT community have actually lost their task, consisting of Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender woman who claims that her employer informed her that her presence may make other individuals feel unpleasant. [26]

Almost half of the United States also have state-level or municipal-level laws prohibiting the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender people in both public and private workplaces. A few more states ban LGBT discrimination in only public work environments. [27] Some challengers of these laws think that it would intrude on religious liberty, although these laws are focused more on discriminatory actions, not beliefs. Courts have also recognized that these laws do not infringe complimentary speech or religious liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes also supply comprehensive protection from employment discrimination. Some laws extend similar protection as provided by the federal acts to companies who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes offer protection to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws provide higher defense to staff members of the state or of state contractors.

The following table lists categories not secured by federal law. Age is consisted of also, considering that federal law just covers employees over 40.

In addition,

– District of Columbia – enlisting, individual appearance [35]- Michigan – height, weight [53]- Texas – Participation in emergency evacuation order [90]- Vermont – Birthplace [76]
Government employees

Title VII likewise applies to state, federal, local and other public staff members. Employees of federal and state governments have additional defenses against employment discrimination.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 restricts discrimination in federal work on the basis of conduct that does not affect job efficiency. The Office of Personnel Management has actually analyzed this as forbiding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. [91] In June 2009, referall.us it was announced that the interpretation would be broadened to include gender identity. [92]

Additionally, public workers keep their First Amendment rights, whereas private companies deserve to limitations workers’ speech in specific methods. [93] Public staff members keep their First Amendment rights insofar as they are speaking as a civilian (not on behalf of their employer), they are speaking on a matter of public issue, and their speech is not interfering with their task. [93]

Federal staff members who have work discrimination claims, such as postal workers of the United States Postal Service (USPS) should take legal action against in the appropriate federal jurisdiction, which positions a different set of concerns for plaintiffs.

Exceptions

Authentic occupational certifications

Employers are typically allowed to think about characteristics that would otherwise be prejudiced if they are authentic occupational qualifications (BFOQ). The most common BFOQ is sex, and the 2nd most common BFOQ is age. Authentic Occupational Qualifications can not be utilized for discrimination on the basis of race.

The only exception to this rule is shown in a single case, Wittmer v. Peters, where the court guidelines that law enforcement monitoring can match races when needed. For example, if cops are running operations that involve private informants, or undercover agents, sending out an African American officer into a sting for a KKK white supremacy group. Additionally, cops departments, such as the department in Ferguson, Missouri, can consider race-based policing and hire officers that are proportional to the community’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not apply in the show business, such as casting for motion pictures and television. [95] Directors, manufacturers and casting personnel are allowed to cast characters based upon physical qualities, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, etc. Employment discrimination declares for Disparate Treatment are unusual in the entertainment industry, particularly in performers. [95] This reason is unique to the entertainment market, and does not transfer to other industries, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, companies will utilize BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory work discrimination. BFOQ can not be an expense reason in wage gaps between different groups of staff members. [96] Cost can be considered when a company should stabilize privacy and security worry about the variety of positions that an employer are attempting to fill. [96]

Additionally, customer preference alone can not be a validation unless there is a privacy or security defense. [96] For circumstances, retail facilities in rural areas can not restrict African American clerks based upon the racial ideologies of the consumer base. But, matching genders for staffing at centers that manage kids survivors of sexual assault is permitted.

If a company were attempting to prove that employment discrimination was based on a BFOQ, there need to be a factual basis for thinking that all or considerably all members of a class would be unable to carry out the task safely and effectively or that it is impractical to determine qualifications on an individualized basis. [97] Additionally, lack of a malicious motive does not convert a facially discriminatory policy into a neutral policy with an inequitable impact. [97] Employers also bring the burden to show that a BFOQ is fairly required, and a lesser inequitable alternative method does not exist. [98]

Religious work discrimination

“Religious discrimination is dealing with people differently in their employment due to the fact that of their religion, their faiths and practices, and/or their ask for lodging (a modification in an office rule or policy) of their religious beliefs and practices. It also consists of dealing with people differently in their employment because of their absence of religion or practice” (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Job Opportunity Commission, companies are forbidden from declining to hire a specific based on their faith- alike race, sex, age, and impairment. If an employee believes that they have experienced religious discrimination, they must resolve this to the supposed transgressor. On the other hand, employees are secured by the law for reporting job discrimination and are able to file charges with the EEOC. [100] Some locations in the U.S. now have clauses that ban discrimination against atheists. The courts and laws of the United States offer particular exemptions in these laws to companies or institutions that are spiritual or religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to differing degrees in various places, depending on the setting and the context; some of these have been supported and others reversed with time.

The most current and prevalent example of Religious Discrimination is the prevalent rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many staff members are utilizing religions against modifying the body and preventative medication as a validation to not get the vaccination. Companies that do not allow employees to obtain religious exemptions, or reject their application might be charged by the staff member with work discrimination on the basis of faiths. However, there are particular requirements for staff members to present proof that it is an all the best held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 clearly allows discrimination against members of the Communist Party.

Military

The armed force has actually dealt with criticism for prohibiting females from serving in fight functions. In 2016, nevertheless, the law was changed to enable them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the post posted on the PBS website, Henry Louis Gates Jr. writes about the way in which black men were treated in the military during the 1940s. According to Gates, during that time the whites gave the African Americans a possibility to prove themselves as Americans by having them take part in the war. The National Geographic website states, however, that when black soldiers joined the Navy, they were only permitted to work as servants; their participation was limited to the functions of mess attendants, stewards, somalibidders.com and cooks. Even when African Americans wanted to defend the country they lived in, they were denied the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) secures the job rights of individuals who voluntarily or involuntarily leave employment positions to carry out military service or particular types of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law also forbids employers from victimizing staff members for past or present involvement or subscription in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that provide preference to veterans versus non-veterans has actually been alleged to enforce systemic disparate treatment of women due to the fact that there is a huge underrepresentation of ladies in the uniformed services. [106] The court has rejected this claim since there was no prejudiced intent towards females in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not directly discriminate against a protected category may still be prohibited if they produce a diverse influence on members of a safeguarded group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 restricts employment practices that have a prejudiced impact, unless they are associated to job performance.

The Act requires the removal of artificial, approximate, and unneeded barriers to work that run invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, an employment practice that operates to exclude Negroes can not be revealed to be connected to job performance, it is prohibited, notwithstanding the employer’s absence of prejudiced intent. [107]

Height and weight requirements have been determined by the EEOC as having a disparate effect on nationwide origin minorities. [108]

When resisting a diverse impact claim that declares age discrimination, a company, however, does not require to show necessity; rather, it needs to merely reveal that its practice is affordable. [citation needed]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) analyzes and imposes the Equal Pay Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964, Title I and V of the Americans With Disabilities Act, Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Civil Liberty Act of 1991. [109] The Commission was established by the Civil liberty Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement arrangements are included in section 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its guidelines and guidelines are consisted of in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wishing to file fit under Title VII and/or the ADA should tire their administrative solutions by filing an administrative complaint with the EEOC prior to filing their suit in court. [113]

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs imposes Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which restricts discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities by federal contractors and subcontractors. [114]

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each agency has and implements its own regulations that apply to its own programs and to any entities that get financial help. [16]

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) implements the anti-discrimination arrangements of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b, which forbids discrimination based upon citizenship status or national origin. [115]

State Fair Employment Practices (FEP) workplaces play the EEOC in administering state statutes. [113]

See also

Employment Non-Discrimination Act
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination against persons with rap sheets in the United States
Racial wage gap in the United States
Gender pay gap in the United States
Criticism of credit scoring systems in the United States

References

^ a b c d e “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964”. US EEOC. Archived from the initial on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “The Equal Pay Act of 1963”. Archived from the initial on April 5, 2020. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020 ).
^ a b “Pregnancy Discrimination Act”. Archived from the original on May 12, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b “Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, As Amended”. ADA.gov. Archived from the original on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Questions and Answers: The Americans with Disabilities Act and Persons with HIV/AIDS”. Archived from the initial on July 22, 2009. Retrieved July 21, 2009.
^ a b “The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967”. Archived from the initial on December 13, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “USERRA – Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act”. DOL. Archived from the original on December 11, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b 11 U.S.C. § 525
^ a b “Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008” (PDF). gpo.gov. May 21, 2008. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 6, 2018. Retrieved January 6, 2015.
^ 8 U.S.C. § 1324b
^ a b Blankenship, Kim M (1993 ). “Bringing Gender and Race in: U.S. Employment Discrimination Policy”. Gender and Society. 7 (2 ): 204-226. doi:10.1177/ 089124393007002004. JSTOR 189578. S2CID 144175260.
^ “Family and Medical Leave Act”. Archived from the initial on June 18, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b Rozmarin, George C (1980 ). “Employment Discrimination Laws and Their Application”. Law Notes for the Family Doctor. 16 (1 ): 25-29. JSTOR 44066330.
^ Neumark, D (2003 ). “Age discrimination legislations in the United States” (PDF). Contemporary Economic Policy. 21 (3 ): 297-317. doi:10.1093/ cep/byg012. S2CID 38171380. Archived (PDF) from the original on June 2, 2018. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “Guide to Disability Rights Laws”. ADA.gov. December 20, 2023. Archived from the original on November 14, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “30 USC Sec. 938”. Archived from the original on June 7, 2011. Retrieved July 21, 2009.
^ “Summary of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986”. Archived from the original on May 6, 2013. Retrieved August 14, 2021.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 1981 – Equal rights under the law”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on December 16, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 1981a – Damages in cases of intentional discrimination in employment”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on November 27, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)”. Archived from the initial on June 17, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ Tilcsik, András (January 1, 2011). “Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States”. American Journal of Sociology. 117 (2 ): 586-626. doi:10.1086/ 661653. hdl:1807/ 34998. JSTOR 10.1086/ 661653. PMID 22268247. S2CID 23542996. Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “In Landmark Ruling, Feds Add Transgendered to Anti-Discrimination Law:: EDGE Boston, MA”. Edgeboston.com. April 25, 2012. Archived from the initial on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Carpenter, Dale (December 14, 2012). “Anti-gay discrimination is sex discrimination, states the EEOC”. The Washington Post. Archived from the original on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Tatectate, Curtis. “EEOC: Federal law prohibits office bias against gays, lesbians, bisexuals|Miami Herald Miami Herald”. Miamiherald.com. Archived from the initial on April 28, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Burns, Crosby; Krehely, Jeff (June 2, 2011). “Gay and Transgender People Face High Rates of Workplace Discrimination and Harassment”. Center for American Progress. Archived from the initial on November 26, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Sexual Orientation Discrimination in the Workplace”. FindLaw. Archived from the initial on May 7, 2021. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ Lowndes, Coleman; Maza, Carlos (September 23, 2014). “The Top Five Myths About LGBT Non-Discrimination Laws Debunked”. Media Matters for America. Archived from the original on June 17, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Code of Alabama 25-1-21”. Archived from the original on July 23, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b c “Alaska Statutes: AS 18.80.220. Unlawful Employment Practices; Exception”. touchngo.com. Archived from the initial on December 6, 2022. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d e f “Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA)”. California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. CA.gov. 2010. Archived from the original on September 9, 2016. Retrieved September 9, 2016.
^ a b “Colorado Civil liberty Division 2008 Statutes” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on May 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Chapter 814c Sec. 46a-60”. Archived from the initial on October 17, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Delaware Code Online”. delcode.delaware.gov. Archived from the initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d e “District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977; Prohibited Acts of Discrimination” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 23, 2009. Retrieved August 8, 2019. ^ “District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977; Table of Contents, General Provisions” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 30, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Statutes & Constitution: View Statutes:-> 2008-> Ch0760-> Section 10: Online Sunshine”. www.leg.state.fl.us. Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Georgia Fair Employment Practices Act”. Archived from the original on January 29, 2010. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Hawaii Rev Statutes 378-2”. Archived from the original on August 14, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Idaho Commission on Human Rights: Age Discrimination””. Archived from the initial on February 21, 2018. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Illinois Human Rights Act”. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Indiana General Assembly”. iga.in.gov. Archived from the initial on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Iowa Code 216.6”. Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Kansas Age Discrimination in Employment Act” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial on October 6, 2008. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Kentucky Revised Statutes 344.040” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on October 8, 2009.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:352”. Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:312”. Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:311”. Archived from the initial on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Title 5, 337: HUMAN RIGHTS ACT”. www.mainelegislature.org. Archived from the initial on February 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Annotated Code of Maryland 49B.16”. Archived from the initial on September 29, 2011. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “M.G.L. 151B § 4”. Archived from the original on July 7, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “M.G.L 151B § 1”. Archived from the initial on June 4, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Elliott-Larsen Civil liberty Act” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on December 26, 2014. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Minnesota Statutes, area 363A.08″. Archived from the original on September 6, 2015. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 213.055 R.S.Mo”. Archived from the initial on May 23, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Montana Code Annotated 49-2-303”. Archived from the original on September 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act”. Archived from the original on November 26, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “NRS: CHAPTER 613 – EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES”. www.leg.state.nv.us. Archived from the original on December 24, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Section 354-A:7 Unlawful Discriminatory Practices”. Archived from the original on January 2, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (N.J.S.A. 10:5 -12)”.
^ a b c “2006 New Mexico Statutes – Section 28-1-7 – Unlawful discriminatory practice”. Justia Law. Archived from the original on September 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “New york city State Executive Law, Article 15, Section 296”. Archived from the initial on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “New york city Labor Law Section 201-D – Discrimination against the engagement in particular activities. – New York Attorney Resources – New York City Laws”. law.onecle.com. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 95-28″. www.ncleg.net. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 95-28″. www.ncleg.net. Archived from the original on December 15, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “North Dakota Human Rights Act” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 18, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ “2006 Ohio Revised Code -:: 4112. Civil Rights Commission”. Justia Law. Archived from the original on March 9, 2016. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Oklahoma Chief Law Officer|”. www.oag.ok.gov. Archived from the original on December 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 659A”. Archived from the original on August 16, 2023. Retrieved October 17, 2019.
^ “Laws Administered by the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission” (PDF). [irreversible dead link] ^ “State of Rhode Island General Assembly”. www.rilegislature.gov. Archived from the initial on October 14, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “South Carolina Human Affairs Law”. Archived from the original on May 6, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ “Tennessee State Government – TN.gov”. www.tn.gov. Archived from the initial on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “LABOR CODE CHAPTER 21. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the original on September 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Utah Code 34A-5-106”. Archived from the initial on July 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on June 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ “Virginia Human Rights Act”. Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “RCW 49.60.180: Unfair practices of companies”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on November 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.60.172: Unfair practices with respect to HIV or hepatitis C infection”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.60.174: Evaluation of claim of discrimination-Actual or perceived HIV or hepatitis C infection”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in work because of age of worker or applicant-Exceptions”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “State of West Virginia” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “Wisconsin Statutes Table of Contents”. docs.legis.wisconsin.gov. Archived from the initial on November 3, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ Wyoming Code 27-9-105 [irreversible dead link] ^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 3” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 5” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ a b “Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146”. Archived from the original on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Puerto Rico Laws PR 29-I-7-151”. Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451”. Archived from the original on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “LABOR CODE CHAPTER 22. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION FOR PARTICIPATING IN EMERGENCY EVACUATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the initial on June 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Addressing Sexual Orientation Discrimination In Federal Civilian Employment: A Guide to Employee’s Rights”. Archived from the initial on January 14, 2007.
^ Rutenberg, Jim (June 24, 2009). “New Protections for Transgender Federal Workers (Published 2009)”. The New York City Times. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023.
^ a b “Federal Employee Speech & the First Amendment|ACLU of DC”. www.acludc.org. November 9, 2017. Archived from the initial on September 21, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri”. www.justice.gov. March 4, 2015. Archived from the initial on August 12, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b c “When is it legal for an employer to discriminate in their employing practices based on an Authentic Occupation Qualification?”. University of Cincinnati Law Review Blog. April 27, 2016. Archived from the initial on April 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b c “CM-625 Authentic Occupational Qualifications”. US EEOC. January 2, 1982. Archived from the initial on December 12, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b “United Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls, 499 U.S. 187 (1991 )”. Justia Law. Archived from the initial on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977 )”. Justia Law. Archived from the original on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “Religious Discrimination – Workplace Fairness”. www.workplacefairness.org. Archived from the original on November 12, 2023. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Questions and Answers about Religious Discrimination in the Workplace”. www.eeoc.gov. January 31, 2011. Archived from the initial on March 5, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Sincerely Held or Suddenly Held Religious Exemptions to Vaccination?”. www.americanbar.org. Archived from the original on December 19, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ Thom Patterson (November 10, 2016). “Get all set for more US women in battle”. CNN. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ http://www.militaryaerospace.com/blogs/mil-aero-blog/2012/12/conspicuous-gallantry-doris-miller-at-pearl-harbor-was-one-of-world-war-ii-s-first-heroes.html Archived May 30, 2023, at the Wayback Machine [1] ^ Gates, Henry Louis; Root, Jr|Originally published on The (January 14, 2013). “Segregation in the Armed Forces During The Second World War|African American History Blog”. The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross. Archived from the initial on June 21, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ a b “USERRA – Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act”. DOL. Archived from the original on December 11, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b “Personnel Adm’r of Massachusetts v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256 (1979 )”. Justia Law. Archived from the initial on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court case and opinions”. Findlaw. Archived from the initial on August 25, 2019. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Shaping Employment Discrimination Law”. Archived from the original on May 11, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws”. Archived from the initial on August 6, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Pre 1965: Events Causing the Creation of EEOC”. Archived from the original on August 26, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 2000e-5 – Enforcement provisions”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the initial on November 1, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “PART 1614– FEDERAL SECTOR EQUAL JOB OPPORTUNITY”. Archived from the original on July 27, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ a b “Filing a Charge of Employment Discrimination”. Archived from the initial on August 12, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 503”. Archived from the original on August 2, 2009. Retrieved August 1, 2009.
^ “An Overview of the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices”. Archived from the original on May 31, 2009. Retrieved July 30, 2009.
External links

Directory of state labor departments, from the U.S. Department of Labor
Disability Discrimination, by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Sex-Based Discrimination, by the U.S. Equal Job Opportunity Commission
Your Rights At Work (Connecticut).
– Barnes, Patricia G., (2014 ), Betrayed: The Legalization of Age Discrimination in the Workplace. The author, an attorney and judge, argues that the U.S. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 stops working to protect older workers. Weak to begin with, she states that the ADEA has actually been devitalized by the U.S. Supreme Court.
– Tweedy, Ann E. and Karen Yescavage, Employment Discrimination Against Bisexuals: An Empirical Study, 21 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L.