Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States obtains from the typical law, and is codified in various state, federal, and regional laws. These laws restrict discrimination based on certain attributes or “secured classifications”. The United States Constitution also prohibits discrimination by federal and state federal governments against their public workers. Discrimination in the economic sector is not straight constrained by the Constitution, but has actually become subject to a growing body of federal and state law, including the Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964. Federal law forbids discrimination in a variety of locations, including recruiting, hiring, job examinations, promotion policies, training, compensation and disciplinary action. State laws frequently extend security to additional categories or companies.

Under federal work discrimination law, employers usually can not discriminate against workers on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (including sexual preference and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] religious beliefs, [1] nationwide origin, [1] special needs (physical or psychological, including status), [5] [6] age (for employees over 40), [7] military service or affiliation, [8] insolvency or uncollectable bills, [9] hereditary information, [10] and citizenship status (for people, long-term citizens, temporary 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 Rights Act of 1964
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title IX

Constitutional basis

The United States Constitution does not straight attend to employment discrimination, however its prohibitions on discrimination by the federal government have actually been held to safeguard federal government employees.

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 a specific requirement that the federal government does not deny individuals of “life, liberty, or home”, without due process of the law. It likewise contains an implicit guarantee that the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly prohibits states from breaking a person’s rights of due process and equivalent security. In the employment context, these Constitutional provisions would limit the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their employment practices by treating workers, previous staff members, or job candidates unequally due to the fact that of subscription in a group (such as a race or sex). Due process protection needs that government staff members have a reasonable procedural process before they are terminated if the termination is associated with a “liberty” (such as the right to totally free speech) or residential or commercial property 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 offer their particular federal government the power to enact civil rights laws that use to the economic sector. The Federal government’s authority to control a personal business, consisting of civil rights laws, comes from their power to control all commerce in between the States. Some State Constitutions do specifically pay for some defense from public and private employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions only attend to prejudiced treatment by the federal government, consisting of a public company.

Absent of an arrangement in a State Constitution, State civil rights laws that regulate the economic sector are typically Constitutional under the “authorities powers” doctrine or the power of a State to enact laws created to safeguard public health, safety and morals. All States must follow the Federal Civil Rights laws, but States may enact civil liberties laws that provide additional work defense.

For instance, some State civil liberties laws offer security from employment discrimination on the basis of political association, even though such forms of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil rights laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing employment discrimination has established in time.

The Equal Pay Act modified 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 forbids employers and unions from paying different incomes based on sex. It does not prohibit other prejudiced practices in hiring. It provides that where workers perform equal operate in the corner needing “equal ability, effort, and duty and performed under similar working conditions,” they ought to be provided equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act applies to employers engaged in some aspect of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s workers if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a considerable amount of interstate commerce. [citation required]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 restricts discrimination in much more aspects of the work relationship. “Title VII developed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act”. [12] It uses to most employers engaged in interstate commerce with more than 15 staff members, labor companies, and employment service. Title VII forbids discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. It makes it unlawful for employers to discriminate based upon secured qualities concerning terms, conditions, and benefits of employment. Employment firms might not discriminate when employing or referring candidates, and labor companies are likewise 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 unlawful sex discrimination includes discrimination based on 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 “prohibits discrimination by federal contractors and subcontractors on account of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin [and] requires affirmative action by federal contractors”. [14]

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and amended in 1978 and 1986, restricts employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The restricted practices are nearly similar to those laid out in Title VII, except that the ADEA secures workers in firms with 20 or more employees instead of 15 or more. A staff member is secured from discrimination based on age if he or she is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has actually phased out and prohibited obligatory retirement, other than for high-powered decision-making positions (that likewise offer large pensions). The ADEA consists of specific standards for benefit, 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 work in 1956” by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 “established a policy versus age discrimination among federal specialists”. [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 forbids employment discrimination on the basis of disability by the federal government, federal professionals with agreements of more than $10,000, and programs getting federal financial support. [16] It needs affirmative action in addition to non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 needs reasonable lodging, and Section 508 requires that electronic and information technology be available to handicapped employees. [16]

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

The Vietnam Era Readjustment Act of 1974 “requires affirmative action for disabled and Vietnam period veterans by federal professionals”. [14]

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

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 prohibits companies with more than three staff members from discriminating against anyone (other than an unapproved immigrant) on the basis of national origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to get rid of discriminatory barriers against qualified individuals with impairments, individuals with a record of a disability, or people who are considered as having a special needs. It forbids discrimination based upon real or viewed physical or mental impairments. It likewise needs companies to offer reasonable lodgings to employees who require them due to the fact that of a special needs to get a task, carry out the vital functions of a task, or take pleasure in the benefits and benefits of work, unless the employer can show that unnecessary challenge will result. There are strict constraints on when an employer can ask disability-related concerns or need medical examinations, and all medical details needs to be treated as private. A disability is specified under the ADA as a psychological or physical health condition that “substantially restricts several significant life activities. ” [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Liberty Acts, amended in 1993, guarantee all persons equal rights under the law and describe the damages readily available to complainants in actions brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights 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 utilizing people’ genetic info when making hiring, firing, task positioning, or promo decisions. [10]

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

LGBT employment discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 restricts employment discrimination on the basis of sexual preference or gender identity. This is encompassed by the law’s restriction 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 Job Opportunity Commission (2020 ), employment securities for LGBT people were patchwork; a number of states and localities clearly prohibit harassment and predisposition in employment decisions on the basis of sexual preference and/or gender identity, although some only cover public staff members. [22] Prior to the Bostock decision, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) analyzed Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC’s identified that transgender employees were secured under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the defense to include sexual orientation in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: “Studies show 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 employees report some form of harassment or mistreatment on the task.” Many people in the LGBT community have lost their job, including Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender lady who declares that her boss informed her that her existence might make other individuals feel uneasy. [26]

Almost half of the United States likewise have state-level or municipal-level laws banning the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender individuals in both public and private workplaces. A few more states ban LGBT discrimination in just public work environments. [27] Some opponents of these laws believe that it would invade religious liberty, despite the fact that these laws are focused more on prejudiced actions, not beliefs. Courts have actually also recognized that these laws do not infringe complimentary speech or spiritual liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes likewise supply substantial defense from work discrimination. Some laws extend comparable protection as provided by the federal acts to employers who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes supply defense to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws provide greater protection to workers of the state or of state specialists.

The following table lists categories not secured by federal law. Age is included also, given that federal law only covers workers over 40.

In addition,

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

Title VII likewise uses to state, federal, regional and other public employees. Employees of federal and state governments have additional securities versus employment discrimination.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 forbids discrimination in federal work on the basis of conduct that does not affect job performance. The Office of Personnel Management has actually analyzed this as restricting discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. [91] In June 2009, it was revealed that the interpretation would be expanded to consist of gender identity. [92]

Additionally, public employees maintain their First Amendment rights, whereas private companies have the right to limits staff members’ speech in particular ways. [93] Public workers maintain their First Amendment rights insofar as they are speaking as a private citizen (not on behalf of their employer), they are speaking on a matter of public issue, referall.us and their speech is not interfering with their task. [93]

Federal staff members who have work discrimination claims, such as postal employees of the United States Postal Service (USPS) must take legal action against in the proper federal jurisdiction, which presents a various set of problems for complainants.

Exceptions

Bona fide occupational credentials

Employers are usually allowed to consider attributes that would otherwise be inequitable if they are authentic occupational certifications (BFOQ). The most common BFOQ is sex, and the second most typical BFOQ is age. Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications can not be utilized for discrimination on the basis of race.

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

BFOQs do not apply in the home entertainment industry, such as casting for films and tv. [95] Directors, producers and casting personnel are allowed to cast characters based upon physical characteristics, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, etc. Employment discrimination claims for Disparate Treatment are unusual in the entertainment industry, particularly in performers. [95] This justification is distinct to the entertainment industry, and does not move to other markets, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, companies will utilize BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory employment discrimination. BFOQ can not be an expense justification in wage spaces between different groups of staff members. [96] Cost can be considered when an employer needs to stabilize privacy and safety issues with the number of positions that a company are attempting to fill. [96]

Additionally, consumer preference alone can not be a validation unless there is a privacy or security defense. [96] For instance, 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 facilities that handle children survivors of sexual assault is allowed.

If a company were attempting to show that employment discrimination was based upon a BFOQ, there must be an accurate basis for believing that all or considerably all members of a class would be not able to perform the job safely and efficiently or that it is impractical to figure out certifications on an individualized basis. [97] Additionally, lack of a sinister intention does not convert a facially prejudiced policy into a neutral policy with a prejudiced effect. [97] Employers likewise carry the concern to show that a BFOQ is reasonably required, and somalibidders.com a lower prejudiced alternative technique does not exist. [98]

Religious employment discrimination

“Religious discrimination is treating individuals in a different way in their employment since of their religious beliefs, their religions and practices, and/or their ask for accommodation (a change in a workplace rule or policy) of their religions and practices. It also consists of dealing with people differently in their work because of their lack of spiritual belief or practice” (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, employers are prohibited from refusing to work with a specific based upon their faith- alike race, sex, age, and impairment. If an employee thinks that they have experienced religious discrimination, they must resolve this to the alleged culprit. On the other hand, workers are secured by the law for reporting task discrimination and have the ability to submit charges with the EEOC. [100] Some areas in the U.S. now have clauses that ban discrimination against atheists. The courts and laws of the United States provide certain exemptions in these laws to services or institutions that are spiritual or religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to differing degrees in various locations, depending upon the setting and the context; a few of these have been upheld and others reversed gradually.

The most recent and prevalent example of Religious Discrimination is the prevalent rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many employees are using spiritual beliefs versus modifying the body and preventative medication as a justification to not receive the vaccination. Companies that do not enable staff members to get religious exemptions, or reject their application may be charged by the staff member with work discrimination on the basis of religions. However, there are specific requirements for workers to present proof that it is a genuinely held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

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

Military

The armed force has actually faced criticism for forbiding ladies from serving in fight functions. In 2016, nevertheless, the law was amended to permit them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the post posted on the PBS site, Henry Louis Gates Jr. composes about the way in which black males were dealt with in the military during the 1940s. According to Gates, during that time the whites offered 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 signed up with the Navy, they were only permitted to work as servants; their involvement was restricted to the roles of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans wished to protect 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 individuals who voluntarily or involuntarily leave employment positions to carry out military service or specific types of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law also prohibits companies from discriminating versus employees for previous or present involvement or membership in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that give choice to veterans versus non-veterans has been declared to enforce systemic diverse treatment of ladies since there is a huge underrepresentation of females in the uniformed services. [106] The court has declined this claim due to the fact that there was no discriminatory intent towards women in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not directly victimize a safeguarded classification might still be unlawful if they produce a disparate influence on members of a secured group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 restricts work practices that have an inequitable impact, unless they relate to task performance.

The Act requires the removal of artificial, arbitrary, and unneeded barriers to employment that run invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, if, as here, an employment practice that runs to omit Negroes can not be revealed to be connected to task performance, it is prohibited, regardless of the company’s absence of prejudiced intent. [107]

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

When safeguarding versus a disparate impact claim that declares age discrimination, an employer, nevertheless, does not need to demonstrate necessity; rather, it should simply show that its practice is reasonable. [citation required]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) analyzes and imposes the Equal Pay Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights 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 contained in section 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its guidelines and standards are contained in Title 29 of the Code of Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wanting to file match under Title VII and/or the ADA must tire their administrative remedies by filing an administrative complaint with the EEOC prior to filing their lawsuit in court. [113]

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs enforces Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which forbids discrimination versus qualified people with specials needs by federal professionals and subcontractors. [114]

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

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) imposes the anti-discrimination provisions 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 individuals with rap sheets in the United States
Racial wage space 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 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 original on May 12, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ a b “Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, As Amended”. ADA.gov. Archived from the initial 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 original 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 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 initial 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 initial 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 initial 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 versus 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 original 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 bans workplace 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 Orientation 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 initial on May 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Chapter 814c Sec. 46a-60”. Archived from the original 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; Tabulation, 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. 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 original on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Indiana General Assembly”. iga.in.gov. Archived from the original 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 original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Title 5, Chapter 337: HUMAN RIGHTS ACT”. www.mainelegislature.org. Archived from the original on February 28, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Annotated Code of Maryland 49B.16”. Archived from the original on September 29, 2011. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “M.G.L. 151B § 4”. Archived from the initial on July 7, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “M.G.L 151B § 1”. Archived from the original on June 4, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Elliott-Larsen Civil liberty 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 initial on September 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act”. Archived from the initial 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 initial 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 original on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “New york city Labor Law Section 201-D – Discrimination versus the engagement in specific 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 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 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 initial 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 original 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 initial 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 liver disease 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 viewed HIV or liver disease 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 employee 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 initial on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d “Wisconsin Statutes Tabulation”. 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 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 original on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451”. Archived from the initial 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 initial on June 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Addressing Sexual Preference 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 original 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 Liberties 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 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 original 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 original 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 prepared for more US ladies in battle”. CNN. Archived from the initial 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 Armed Forces During World War II|African American History Blog”. The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross. Archived from the original on June 21, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ a b “USERRA – Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act”. DOL. Archived from the initial 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 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 Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws”. Archived from the original on August 6, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “Pre 1965: Events Resulting In the Creation of EEOC”. Archived from the initial on August 26, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ “42 U.S. Code § 2000e-5 – Enforcement provisions”. LII/ Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on November 1, 2019. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “PART 1614– FEDERAL SECTOR EQUAL JOB OPPORTUNITY”. Archived from the initial 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 initial 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 initial 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 Job 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 fails to safeguard older employees. Weak to start with, she mentions that the ADEA has 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.