Supreme Court makes it easier to claim ‘reverse discrimination' in employment, in a case from Ohio
Advertisement
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars sex discrimination in the workplace. A trial court and the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Ames.
The 6th circuit is among the courts that had required an additional requirement for people like Ames, showing 'background circumstances' that might include that LGBTQ people made the decisions affecting Ames or statistical evidence of a pattern of discrimination against members of the majority group.
The appeals court noted that Ames didn't provide any such circumstances.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Supreme Court puts voting rights on the menu
The Louisiana case is The new map also drew a legal challenge based on the claim that it, too, was a racial gerrymander that disadvantaged ' Advertisement After hearing arguments in the case in March, rather than issuing an opinion, the justices decided they had more questions, kicking the case to next term in order to hold another round of arguments. But Advertisement But that decision left in place Section 2 of the act, which gives citizens the right to challenge racially discriminatory voter laws or mapmaking after they go into effect. That could soon change, especially if Justice Clarence Thomas can find four other justices who support his view, expressed in a dissent. Thomas believes that Section 2 violates the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. In essence, he said the Constitution prohibits the consideration of race at all in redistricting, turning the seminal civil rights legislation that aimed to address the nation's long history of racial voter suppression on its head. If four other justices join him in this view, the Voting Rights Act will, for all intents and purposes, be struck down. So the rescheduled arguments will be among the most pivotal of the next term. If that weren't enough, the court also announced Monday that it will Advertisement Another case to keep an eye on: The court Transgender women have been used as red herrings by conservative activists who claim them to be a dangerous threat, despite the fact that trans women are grossly underrepresented in sports at the grade school, college, and professional level. Bans are literally solutions in search of a problem. But the scare tactics have been so successful that even some Democrats, A Supreme Court ruling upholding such bans — and eroding the constitutional protections for LGBTQ people in the process — would be a profound sea change from 10 years ago, when the court underscored that all people have a fundamental right to marry, regardless of gender. This is an excerpt from , a newsletter about the Supreme Court from columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Kimberly Atkins Stohr is a columnist for the Globe. She may be reached at
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy implies rainbow crosswalks could lead to traffic dangers
As Americans crowd highways and airports for the peak summer travel season, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has announced a sweeping national initiative that could put rainbow-painted crosswalks and broader debates over how cities express identity and inclusion squarely in the federal spotlight. Keep up with the latest in + news and politics. In a letter on Tuesday, Duffy urged governors nationwide to comply with SAFE ROADS, a new Trump administration program aiming to eliminate 'distractions' from non-freeway arterial roads. 'Roads are for safety, not political messages or artwork,' Duffy wrote. Related: Pete Buttigieg, first out gay Cabinet secretary, to be replaced by antigay former reality star & Fox News host Although he conceded that, under the Biden administration, estimated traffic fatalities declined by 3.8 percent in 2024 compared to 2023 levels, Duffy emphasized that the estimated toll of 39,345 deaths remains 'unacceptable,' and pressed states to identify hazardous roads within 60 days, with fixes expected by the end of the 2026 fiscal year. Yet what defines a 'distraction' is far from settled. In Alexandria, Virginia, rainbow crosswalks were permanently installed last year after residents called for visible support for the LGBTQ+ community. 'I've heard from numerous residents who were excited to see Alexandria finally join the list of cities across the nation with this sort of permanent Pride artwork,' Councilman R. Kirk McPike told local outlet The Zebra in 2024. Relted: Fox News anchor appears to use antigay slur in rant about Pete Buttigieg The debate over colorful crosswalks goes beyond aesthetics—it touches on centuries of urban design and social meaning. The notion of the crosswalk dates back over 2,000 years to Pompeii, where raised stones allowed pedestrians to cross without stepping into traffic. Modern zebra crossings, first introduced in England in 1951, have become global symbols of pedestrian safety, thanks to their high-contrast stripes, which aid those with low vision in navigating busy streets. But cities are increasingly experimenting. From 3D optical illusions designed to slow cars to LED-lit pathways triggered by pedestrian motion, the crosswalk has evolved into a canvas of both technology and community identity. Advocates argue that colorful designs can heighten visibility and foster civic pride. 'There are hundreds around the country, if not thousands around the world, and I don't know of any study that has been able to show that they are actually causing any problems,' urban designer Michael Lydon told The New York Times in 2019. Lyndon has collaborated with cities to develop street art projects for over ten years. Related: Donald Trump's DOT will prioritize areas with higher 'marriage and birth rates' At the heart of Duffy's push is a long-running federal insistence on uniformity. The rules of the road are governed by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, a dense guide that dictates everything from the shape of stop signs to the width and color of crosswalk lines. Federal skepticism about colorful crosswalks is hardly a new phenomenon. A 2013 memo from the Federal Highway Administration warned that 'crosswalk art' might degrade the contrast of white markings and give pedestrians a false sense of security. The FHWA concluded that aesthetic treatments, particularly those with retroreflective properties or symbolic designs, risk confusing drivers and are 'contrary to the goal of increased safety.' Yet, even the agency has admitted that it lacks direct research showing that rainbow crosswalks cause crashes. Related: Pete Buttigieg blasts 'despicable' Donald Trump for blaming D.C. plane crash on DEI In 2017, the Federal Highway Administration ordered Lexington, Kentucky, to remove its rainbow-painted crosswalk installed downtown for Pride celebrations, warning it posed a legal liability and could confuse motorists. Yet LGBTQ+ advocates in Lexington pointed out that other cities—including Philadelphia, Boston, and Atlanta—had rainbow crosswalks without apparent problems, the Herald Leader reported. The Department of Transportation has not provided examples of crashes linked to rainbow crosswalks and did not respond to The Advocate's questions. This article originally appeared on Advocate: Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy implies rainbow crosswalks could lead to traffic dangers Pete Buttigieg blasts 'despicable' Donald Trump for blaming D.C. plane crash on DEI Donald Trump's DOT will prioritize areas with higher 'marriage and birth rates' Fox News anchor appears to use antigay slur in rant about Pete Buttigieg
Black America Web
8 hours ago
- Black America Web
Trump Administration Cuts Funding For Black Infant Health Research, Labeling It A DEI Initiative
Source: Cultura Creative / Getty It would surprise absolutely no one that infant mortality rates in America are disproportionately high among Black babies, or that Black and Latino babies are more vulnerable than their white counterparts to serious, life-threatening illnesses such as upper respiratory infection (URI). Of course, anyone who has been paying attention to our current political climate would be equally unsurprised to find that, under the Trump administration, medical research that seeks to understand why Black children suffer these health issues so often is under attack, because the results of that research might hurt white people's feelings. In other words, Black babies might have to die in order to placate white fragility. According to The Cincinnati Herald, a federally funded study exploring why Black babies in Detroit are disproportionately born prematurely has been abruptly terminated by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), apparently, because the study focused on the effects of stress associated with racism and poverty, and how that stress might alter gene function and contribute to adverse birth outcomes — or as the Trump administration defines it, DEI. From the Herald: In termination letters sent to researchers, the NIH claimed the project relied on 'artificial and non-scientific categories' linked to DEI and asserted it did not 'enhance health or advance science.' Researchers behind the project strongly contest that explanation, calling the decision politically motivated. The cancellation aligns with a broader initiative by the Trump administration to dismantle DEI initiatives across the federal government, including within health and science agencies. Numerous projects focused on minority and LGBTQ health have been defunded under the same rationale. So, a bunch of so-called medical authorities from the same administration that gave the position of a Secretary of Health and Human Services to RFK Jr. — who thinks Black people don't need vaccines as much as white people because we have super negro immune systems — have canceled funding for this research, because, in their non-medical opinions, any research tied to racial disparities is 'non-scientific.' Actual medical experts, of course, say differently. 'Health-related social needs are health care,' said Dr. Alex Peahl, an OB-GYN at the University of Michigan and co-director of the Partnering for the Future Clinic. 'And if we want to improve the health of pregnant people and their families, we have to care for every part of their lives, not just the clinical pieces.' Peahl noted that access to prenatal care is inseparable from issues like lack of transportation, food insecurity and other external stressors that disproportionately affect Black people. 'It is really hard to come to your prenatal visit if you don't have a car, or to take a medication if you don't have food on the table,' she explained. And it would be nice if the administration of President Donald Trump cared about any of that, but it does not. Source: MEHMET ESER / Getty In April, Trump signed an executive order that essentially made housing discrimination easier by requiring federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), to stop using 'disparate impact' data to identify discriminatory policies and practices that disproportionately harm certain groups. Days before signing that order, Trump signed a similar order discouraging school administrators from using 'disparate impact' data to address racial disparities in disciplinary actions taken against students. In other words: Trump decided researchers can't use data involving racial disparities to study potential racial discrimination because, in his mind and that of his ilk, anything that addresses systemic racism against anyone but white people is a diversity, equity and inclusion effort. Hell, also in April, the Trump administration ended a wastewater settlement for a mostly Black Alabama town, erroneously calling it 'environmental justice as viewed through a distorting, DEI lens' because the case addressed environmental racism. So, a whole town full of Black people has to continue living with well-documented wastewater sanitation issues all because a White House full of white nationalists is far more invested in silencing calls for racial justice than it is in correcting racial injustice (again, except for fictional racial injustice against white people). Anyway, according to the Herald, the research team in Detroit, which is currently scrambling to secure private funding so it can continue its work, has 30 days to appeal the NIH decision. Last month, a federal judge ruled that the agency's funding cuts to minority health research were illegal and an example of 'government racial discrimination' like nothing the judge had ever seen. Unfortunately, that ruling could also be appealed by the Trump administration. The very idea of correcting systemic racism in America makes white conservatives deeply resentful, and Black health continues to suffer because of it. Sad. SEE ALSO: Op-Ed: We Should All Be More Concerned That Trump Keeps Threatening To Deport US Citizens Trump's DOJ Investigates University Of California Over Effort To Recruit Racially Diverse Faculty SEE ALSO Trump Administration Cuts Funding For Black Infant Health Research, Labeling It A DEI Initiative was originally published on
