Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States obtains from the typical law, and is codified in many state, federal, and regional laws. These laws prohibit discrimination based on particular attributes or “secured classifications”. The United States Constitution also forbids discrimination by federal and state federal governments against their public staff members. Discrimination in the private sector is not directly constrained by the Constitution, but has ended up being subject to a growing body of federal and state law, consisting of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal law restricts discrimination in a variety of areas, consisting of recruiting, working with, task assessments, promo policies, training, payment and disciplinary action. State laws typically extend protection to additional categories or employers.

Under federal work discrimination law, referall.us employers typically can not discriminate against staff members on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (including sexual orientation and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] faith, [1] nationwide origin, [1] disability (physical or psychological, consisting of status), [5] [6] age (for workers over 40), [7] military service or association, [8] insolvency or bad debts, [9] genetic info, [10] and citizenship status (for citizens, long-term locals, short-lived locals, refugees, and asylees). [11]

List of United States federal discrimination law

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

Title IX

Constitutional basis

The United States Constitution does not directly deal with work discrimination, however its prohibitions on discrimination by the federal government have actually been held to safeguard federal civil servant.

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution limit the power of the federal and state federal governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has a specific requirement that the federal government does not deprive individuals of “life, liberty, or property”, without due process of the law. It likewise consists of an implicit guarantee that the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly forbids states from breaching a person’s rights of due procedure and equivalent defense. In the employment context, these Constitutional arrangements would restrict the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their employment practices by dealing with employees, previous staff members, or job candidates unequally because of subscription in a group (such as a race or sex). Due process defense requires that federal government workers have a fair procedural process before they are terminated if the termination is associated with a “liberty” (such as the right to free speech) or home interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the provision that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination expenses (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 specifically provide their respective federal government the power to enact civil rights laws that use to the personal sector. The Federal government’s authority to regulate a private business, consisting of civil liberties laws, originates from their power to regulate all commerce between the States. Some State Constitutions do specifically pay for some defense from public and personal employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions only address discriminatory treatment by the government, including a public company.

Absent of an arrangement in a State Constitution, State civil liberties laws that control the economic sector are generally Constitutional under the “cops powers” teaching or the power of a State to enact laws developed to secure public health, safety and morals. All States must abide by the Federal Civil Rights laws, however States may enact civil rights laws that use additional employment defense.

For instance, some State civil liberties laws provide defense from work discrimination on the basis of political affiliation, despite the fact that such types of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil rights laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing work discrimination has actually developed with time.

The Equal Pay Act amended the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1963. It is enforced by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor. [12] The Equal Pay Act forbids companies and unions from paying different salaries based upon sex. It does not prohibit other discriminatory practices in hiring. It supplies that where employees carry out equal operate in the corner needing “equal ability, effort, and duty and carried out under similar working conditions,” they need to be supplied equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act applies to companies engaged in some element of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s workers if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a substantial quantity of interstate commerce. [citation needed]

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids discrimination in a lot more elements of the employment relationship. “Title VII produced the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act”. [12] It uses to the majority of companies taken part in interstate commerce with more than 15 staff members, labor companies, and work firms. Title VII forbids discrimination based on race, color, religious beliefs, sex or national origin. It makes it prohibited for employers to discriminate based upon protected attributes concerning terms, conditions, and privileges of work. Employment service may not discriminate when working with or referring applicants, and labor organizations are likewise forbidden from basing subscription or union classifications on race, color, religious beliefs, sex, or national origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII in 1978, defining that illegal sex discrimination includes discrimination based upon pregnancy, childbirth, and associated medical conditions. [4] An associated statute, the Family and Medical Leave Act, sets requirements governing leave for pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions. [13]

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

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and modified in 1978 and 1986, prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The prohibited practices are almost identical to those detailed in Title VII, except that the ADEA protects employees in firms with 20 or more workers instead of 15 or more. A staff member is secured from discrimination based on age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has phased out and restricted mandatory retirement, except for high-powered decision-making positions (that likewise supply big pensions). The ADEA includes explicit guidelines for advantage, pension and retirement strategies. [7] Though ADEA is the center of a lot of conversation of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history starting with the abolishment of “optimal ages of entry into employment in 1956” by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 “established a policy against age discrimination amongst federal contractors”. [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 restricts employment discrimination on the basis of disability by the federal government, federal professionals with contracts of more than $10,000, and programs receiving federal monetary assistance. [16] It requires affirmative action along with non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 needs reasonable accommodation, and Section 508 needs that electronic and info technology be available to handicapped workers. [16]

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

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

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 restricts employment discrimination on the basis of bankruptcy or uncollectable bills. [9]

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 prohibits companies with more than three workers from victimizing anyone (except an unapproved 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 prejudiced barriers against certified individuals 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 real or perceived physical or psychological impairments. It likewise requires employers to provide sensible accommodations to workers who need them since of an impairment to request a task, perform the essential functions of a task, or take pleasure in the advantages and privileges of employment, unless the company can show that unnecessary hardship will result. There are strict constraints on when a company can ask disability-related concerns or require medical checkups, and all medical info should be dealt with as private. A disability is specified under the ADA as a mental or physical health condition that “substantially restricts several significant life activities. ” [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Liberty Acts, modified in 1993, ensure all persons equal rights under the law and outline the damages offered to complainants 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 employers from using people’ genetic details when making hiring, shooting, job placement, or promotion decisions. [10]

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

LGBT work discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 restricts work discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. This is included by the law’s prohibition of work 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 ), employment protections for LGBT individuals were patchwork; a number of states and regions explicitly restrict harassment and bias in employment choices on the basis of sexual preference and/or gender identity, although some only cover public employees. [22] Prior to the Bostock decision, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) interpreted Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC’s identified that transgender staff members were secured under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the defense to include sexual preference in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: “Studies show that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay individuals have experienced some form of discrimination and harassment at the work environment. Moreover, an incredible 90 percent of transgender workers report some type of harassment or mistreatment on the job.” Lots of people in the LGBT community have actually lost their job, consisting of Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender lady who declares that her manager told her that her existence might make other individuals feel uncomfortable. [26]

Almost half of the United States likewise have state-level or municipal-level laws prohibiting the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender individuals in both public and private offices. A couple of more states prohibit LGBT discrimination in just public workplaces. [27] Some opponents of these laws think that it would intrude on religious liberty, even though these laws are focused more on inequitable actions, not beliefs. Courts have actually also determined that these laws do not infringe free speech or spiritual liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes likewise offer comprehensive protection from employment discrimination. Some laws extend similar defense as offered by the federal acts to employers who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes offer protection to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws supply higher security to employees of the state or of state professionals.

The following table lists classifications not secured by federal law. Age is consisted of also, since federal law just covers workers over 40.

In addition,

– District of Columbia – admission, personal look [35]- Michigan – height, weight [53]- Texas – Participation in emergency situation evacuation order [90]- Vermont – Birthplace [76]
Civil servant

Title VII also uses to state, federal, regional and other public staff members. Employees of federal and state governments have extra defenses against employment discrimination.

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

Additionally, public staff members keep their First Amendment rights, whereas personal employers deserve to limitations staff members’ speech in particular ways. [93] Public employees 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 workers who have work discrimination claims, such as postal workers of the United States Postal Service (USPS) must take legal action against in the appropriate federal jurisdiction, which postures a various set of problems for plaintiffs.

Exceptions

Authentic occupational certifications

Employers are generally permitted to think about attributes that would otherwise be prejudiced if they are bona fide occupational certifications (BFOQ). The most common BFOQ is sex, and the 2nd most common BFOQ is age. Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications can not be used 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 security can match races when essential. For instance, if cops are running operations that include private informants, or undercover representatives, sending an African American officer into a sting for a KKK white supremacy group. Additionally, cops departments, such as the department in Ferguson, Missouri, can think about race-based policing and work with officers that are in proportion to the neighborhood’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not apply in the home entertainment market, such as casting for films and television. [95] Directors, producers and casting staff are permitted to cast characters based upon physical characteristics, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, and so on. Employment discrimination claims for Disparate Treatment are unusual in the entertainment market, specifically in performers. [95] This reason is special to the entertainment industry, and does not transfer to other markets, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, employers will use BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory work discrimination. BFOQ can not be a cost reason in wage spaces between different groups of staff members. [96] Cost can be considered when a company must stabilize personal privacy and security concerns with the variety of positions that an employer are attempting to fill. [96]

Additionally, client preference alone can not be a validation unless there is a personal privacy or safety defense. [96] For instance, retail facilities in backwoods can not restrict African American clerks based on the racial ideologies of the consumer base. But, matching genders for staffing at centers that deal with kids survivors of sexual assault is permitted.

If an employer were trying to show that employment discrimination was based upon a BFOQ, there must be an accurate basis for thinking that all or significantly all members of a class would be not able to perform the task securely and efficiently or that it is impractical to figure out certifications on a customized basis. [97] Additionally, lack of a malicious motive does not transform a facially inequitable policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory effect. [97] Employers also bring the problem to show that a BFOQ is fairly necessary, and a lower prejudiced alternative approach does not exist. [98]

Religious employment discrimination

“Religious discrimination is treating individuals in a different way in their employment due to the fact that of their religious beliefs, their religious beliefs and practices, and/or their ask for accommodation (a modification in a workplace guideline or policy) of their spiritual beliefs and practices. It likewise includes dealing with individuals differently in their work since of their lack of faith or practice” (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, employers are prohibited from declining to hire a specific based upon their religion- alike race, sex, age, and disability. If an employee thinks that they have actually experienced spiritual discrimination, they should address this to the alleged culprit. On the other hand, staff members are secured by the law for reporting task discrimination and have the ability to file charges with the EEOC. [100] Some areas in the U.S. now have provisions that ban discrimination versus atheists. The courts and laws of the United States give certain exemptions in these laws to organizations or institutions that are spiritual or religiously-affiliated, somalibidders.com nevertheless, to varying degrees in various places, depending upon the setting and the context; some of these have been upheld and others reversed with time.

The most current and pervasive example of Religious Discrimination is the widespread rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many staff members are utilizing faiths versus changing the body and preventative medication as a justification to not receive the vaccination. Companies that do not permit staff members to make an application for spiritual exemptions, or reject their application might be charged by the employee with employment discrimination on the basis of religions. However, there are certain requirements for staff members to present evidence that it is a seriously held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 clearly allows discrimination versus members of the Communist Party.

Military

The military has actually faced criticism for prohibiting females from serving in combat roles. In 2016, however, adremcareers.com the law was modified to permit them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the article published on the PBS site, Henry Louis Gates Jr. blogs about the method which black guys were treated in the military during the 1940s. According to Gates, during that time the whites gave the African Americans an opportunity to prove themselves as Americans by having them take part in the war. The National Geographic site states, nevertheless, that when black soldiers joined the Navy, they were just allowed to work as servants; their involvement was restricted to the functions of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans wanted to safeguard the nation they lived in, they were denied the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) secures the task rights of people who willingly or involuntarily leave work positions to undertake military service or certain kinds of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law also forbids companies from victimizing employees for previous or present involvement or membership in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that provide choice to veterans versus non-veterans has actually been alleged to impose systemic disparate treatment of females due to the fact that there is a large underrepresentation of women in the uniformed services. [106] The court has rejected this claim because there was no inequitable intent towards women in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

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

The Act needs the removal of synthetic, approximate, and unnecessary barriers to employment that run invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, a work practice that operates to omit Negroes can not be shown to be related to job performance, it is restricted, regardless of the company’s absence of discriminatory intent. [107]

Height and weight requirements have actually been recognized by the EEOC as having a diverse effect on national origin minorities. [108]

When preventing a diverse impact claim that alleges age discrimination, an employer, however, does not require to demonstrate necessity; rather, it needs to just reveal that its practice is affordable. [citation needed]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) translates and implements 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 Rights Act of 1991. [109] The Commission was established by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement provisions are consisted of in area 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its regulations and standards are consisted of in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wanting to file fit under Title VII and/or the ADA need to exhaust their administrative solutions by filing an administrative complaint with the EEOC prior to submitting their claim in court. [113]

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs implements Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibits discrimination against certified people with specials needs by federal professionals and subcontractors. [114]

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each agency has and enforces its own policies that use to its own programs and to any entities that get monetary support. [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 nationwide origin. [115]

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

Employment Non-Discrimination Act
LGBT work discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination versus persons with criminal records in the United States
Racial wage space in the United States
Gender pay space in the United States
Criticism of credit rating systems in the United States

References

^ a b c d e “Title VII of the Civil Liberty 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 initial 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 initial 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 original on June 18, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b Rozmarin, George C (1980 ). “Employment Discrimination Laws and Their Application”. Law Notes for the General Practitioner. 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 initial on June 7, 2011. Retrieved July 21, 2009.
^ “Summary of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986”. Archived from the initial 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 work”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on November 27, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)”. Archived from the original 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 initial on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Tatectate, Curtis. “EEOC: Federal law prohibits office bias versus gays, lesbians, bisexuals|Miami Herald Miami Herald”. Miamiherald.com. Archived from the original 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 original on November 26, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Sexual Preference Discrimination in the Workplace”. FindLaw. Archived from the original 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 initial on June 17, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Code of Alabama 25-1-21”. Archived from the initial 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 original 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 initial (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 original (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. from the initial 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 initial on August 14, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Idaho Commission on Human Rights: Age Discrimination””. Archived from the original 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 initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Kansas Age Discrimination in Employment Act” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original 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 initial 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, Chapter 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 Rights Act” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the initial 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 prejudiced 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 original 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 City Attorney Resources – New York Laws”. law.onecle.com. Archived from the initial 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 initial 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 Liberty Commission”. Justia Law. Archived from the original on March 9, 2016. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Oklahoma Attorney General Of The United States|”. 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 initial on August 16, 2023. Retrieved October 17, 2019.
^ “Laws Administered by the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission” (PDF). [permanent 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 original on December 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “LABOR CODE CHAPTER 21. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the initial on September 25, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Utah Code 34A-5-106”. Archived from the original 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 original on November 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.60.172: Unfair practices with regard 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 liver disease C infection”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in employment since of age of worker or applicant-Exceptions”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original 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 original on November 3, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ Wyoming Code 27-9-105 [permanent dead link] ^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 3” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 5” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ a b “Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146”. Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Puerto Rico Laws PR 29-I-7-151”. Archived from the original 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 TAKING PART IN EMERGENCY EVACUATION”. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the original 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 original 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 a Bona Fide Occupation Qualification?”. University of Cincinnati Law Review Blog. April 27, 2016. Archived from the original 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 initial 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 ladies in fight”. 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 posted on The (January 14, 2013). “Segregation in the Army During World War II|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 original on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court case and viewpoints”. Findlaw. Archived from the original on August 25, 2019. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ “Shaping Employment Discrimination Law”. Archived from the initial on May 11, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Federal Equal Job 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 arrangements”. 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 Introduction 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, a lawyer and judge, argues that the U.S. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 stops working to protect older workers. Weak to start with, she states that the ADEA has been eviscerated 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.