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
Newsweek
9 hours ago
- Newsweek
Trump Admin Ordered to Restore Portions of Grants Stripped From UCLA
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A federal judge has ordered President Donald Trump's administration to restore some of the funding it cut from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) in July, handing a partial victory to the state's public university system which is facing a $1 billion settlement demand from the White House over accusations of antisemitism on campus. Newsweek has reached out to UCLA via email for comment. Why It Matters The White House has cracked down on pro-Palestinian campus protests across the country since Trump returned to office in January. Much of the initiative has involved withholding or freezing hundreds of millions in federal funds for schools that the administration accuses of not doing enough to prevent antisemitism. UCLA was a site of widespread protests last year against the Israeli government's military actions in the Gaza Strip. The university's response to the demonstrations was sharply criticized, particularly after counterprotesters attacked the pro-Palestinian encampment. People walk on the plaza outside Royce Hall, the site of 2024 pro-Palestinian protests, on the UCLA campus on July 30, 2025 in Los Angeles. People walk on the plaza outside Royce Hall, the site of 2024 pro-Palestinian protests, on the UCLA campus on July 30, 2025 in Los To Know Judge Rita F. Lin of the Northern District Court of California, who issued the order on Tuesday, had in June barred the National Science Foundation (NSF) from terminating grants to University of California researchers. UCLA said in early August that the Trump administration had suspended $584 million in federal grants. In her Tuesday ruling, which Newsweek has reviewed, Lin said in the directive, referring to her earlier order, that the NSF was in violation after cutting off funding to UCLA and she ruled that suspended grants be restored. "NSF's actions violate the preliminary injunction," Lin said in the ruling. "Therefore, pursuant to the preliminary injunction, NSF's suspension of the grants at issue here is VACATED." It was not immediately clear how much funding would be returned to the campus. The Trump administration is also seeking a $1 billion settlement from UCLA after a Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division investigation issued a finding on July 29 that the college violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students." UCLA is one of at least eight elite colleges—all in states or districts that voted blue in 2024—that face having their funding and grants cut after being accused of antisemitism over pro-Palestinian protests or op-eds. Many have also been told to change their practices to fall in line with the Trump administration's stance on diversity initiatives, "wokeism," and transgender-inclusive policies. The University of California said last week it was reviewing the $1 billion settlement offer by the Trump administration. The college's president, James B. Milliken, said the size of the proposed settlement would "devastate" the university. What People Are Saying Politico cited attorney for the plaintiffs Claudia Polsky, saying after the Tuesday ruling: "We are delighted that millions of dollars of grants wrongfully held hostage in the administration's political negotiations with UCLA will now be restored." Attorney General Pam Bondi, referring to the July 29 finding by the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, said: "This disgusting breach of civil rights against students will not stand: DOJ will force UCLA to pay a heavy price for putting Jewish Americans at risk and continue our ongoing investigations into other campuses in the UC system." What Happens Next In her ruling, Lin ordered a joint status report by August 19, 2025, to confirm all steps to comply with the Preliminary Injunction have been completed by NSF.
Fox News
12 hours ago
- Fox News
Appeals court allows Arkansas' first-in-the-nation ban on gender transition care for minors to be enforced
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld an Arkansas law prohibiting doctors from providing gender transition medical treatment to minors, reversing a lower court decision that blocked the first-in-the-nation law. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 8-2 on Tuesday to overturn a lower court decision, now allowing the state to enforce the law. The appeals court cited the U.S. Supreme Court decision in June upholding a similar ban in Tennessee, in which the nation's highest court ruled that the law was constitutional and did not discriminate against transgender people. Referencing the Supreme Court's decision, the appeals court agreed with Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, a Republican, that the law did not violate transgender minors' equal protection rights under the U.S. Constitution. "I applaud the court's decision and am pleased that children in Arkansas will be protected from experimental procedures," Griffin said in a statement following the ruling. Arkansas Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote on social media that the ruling "is a win for common sense -- and for our kids." Arkansas became the first U.S. state to ban transgender treatments such as puberty blockers, hormones and surgery for minors in 2021, when the Republican-led legislature passed the ban after they overruled the veto of then-GOP Gov. Asa Hutchinson. Four families of transgender children and two doctors challenged the law, arguing the Save Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act violated parents' due process rights under the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment. Writing the majority opinion, U.S. Circuit Judge Duane Benton said parents have never had a right to obtain medical treatment for their children that a state government had banned. The judge also wrote that the lower court's decision, in which U.S. District Judge Jay Moody ruled in 2023 that the law discriminates against transgender people and poses "immediate and irreparable harm" to transgender children, conflicts with the Supreme Court's decision in the Tennessee case. The law was also previously blocked from taking effect in 2021. U.S. Circuit Judge Jane Kelly, meanwhile, wrote in the dissent that there is a "startling lack of evidence connecting Arkansas' ban on gender-affirming care with its purported goal of protecting children." The American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas were among the groups representing the plaintiffs. "This is a tragically unjust result for transgender Arkansans, their doctors, and their families," Holly Dickson, executive director of the ACLU of Arkansas, said in a statement. "The state had every opportunity and failed at every turn to prove that this law helps children; in fact, this is a dangerous law that harms children," she continued. "The law has already had a profound impact on families across Arkansas who all deserve a fundamental right to do what is best for their children. As we and our clients consider our next steps, we want transgender Arkansans to know they are far from alone and we remain as determined as ever to secure their right to safety, dignity, and equal access to the health care they need." The ruling on Tuesday comes after the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously last week that a similar ban in Oklahoma is constitutional, also relying upon the Supreme Court's decision on the Tennessee law.
CBS News
18 hours ago
- CBS News
State Dept. human rights reports scale back criticism of El Salvador, but fault U.K., Germany
The State Department on Tuesday released a long-awaited series of reports on worldwide human rights practices that reveal scaled-back criticism of select countries including El Salvador and harsher assessments of traditional U.S. allies, including the United Kingdom and Germany. The release follows a period of revisions that administration officials said were meant to "streamline" the reports, which cover events in about 200 countries in 2024 and had been largely completed by the end of the Biden administration. A note included with the reports said they had been "adjusted" to be "aligned to the administration's executive orders." The 2024 reports omit references to LGBTQ discrimination issues and significantly pare back treatments of issues including gender-based violence and government corruption. They no longer include sections dedicated to systemic racial or ethnic discrimination or violence, or to child abuse or child sexual exploitation, among other deletions. Mandated by Congress, the reports have been produced annually by the State Department for decades and are used by U.S. policymakers, human rights workers, foreign governments and judicial bodies worldwide as a resource to inform potential arms sales and court proceedings, and they also function as a U.S.-led check on government corruption and abuses. Rights groups and former State Department officials decried the revisions as an "erasure" of the plight of marginalized communities and what they said was a politically motivated move that undermined the prior value of the reports. "I think the signals are quite loud and quite clear of who they value and who they don't," said Desirée Cormier Smith, former special representative for racial equity and justice, now with the Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice. In the case of El Salvador, which ended presidential term limits in early August and has an agreement with the Trump administration to accept and detain undocumented immigrants from the U.S., the report notes "There were no credible reports of significant human rights abuses" and that the government had taken "credible steps to identify and punish officials who committed human rights abuses." The 2023 report made note of El Salvador's overcrowded prisons and reports of "arbitrary killings; enforced disappearance; torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by security forces; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention," and more. This year's report for Hungary notes "no credible reports of significant human rights abuses" though last year's included extensive mention of "serious government corruption" and restrictions on media freedom. Meanwhile the 2024 report for the United Kingdom notes the "human rights situation worsened," citing "credible reports of serious restrictions on freedom of expression, including enforcement of or threat of criminal or civil laws in order to limit expression; and crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by antisemitism." A similar assessment was offered for Germany and France, countries administration officials including Vice President JD Vance have publicly accused of censorship and the suppression of free speech. Asked by a reporter how the Trump administration squares its stricter monitoring of free expression via social media accounts of U.S. visa applicants with its criticism of European countries restricting hate speech, State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a press briefing Tuesday that "restrictive laws against dis-favored voices, often on political or religious grounds — no matter how disagreeable someone's speech may be — to criminalize it, or silencing it by force only serves as a catalyst for further hatred, suppression, and polarization." The 2024 report for Israel, the West Bank and Gaza does not include a death toll for Israelis or Palestinians since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, a figure that was included in 2023. The report acknowledged a Committee to Protect Journalists figure of 82 Palestinian journalists having been killed in the conflict last year, but also included a line saying that "[i]n some cases, the IDF claimed the journalists killed were embedded with Hamas terrorists." The report did acknowledge troubling human rights records in several countries with which it has struck agreements to deport third national nationals, such as Libya. It noted credible reports of "arbitrary or unlawful killings; disappearances; torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; arbitrary arrest and detention" and other abuses. It also noted of Afghanistan that there was "widespread disregard for the rule of law and official impunity for those responsible for human rights abuses." The U.S. terminated temporary protected status for Afghans last month, leaving more than 12,000 vulnerable to deportation. Reports for Russia, China, North Korea and Iran noted this year, as they did in previous years, "significant" human rights issues and included criticism of inaction by their respective governments to identify or punish those who had committed abuses. "The 2024 human rights report has been restructured in a way that removes redundancies, increases report readability and is more responsive to the legislative mandates that underpin the report," a senior State Department official said in a briefing last week. "U.S. policy on promoting respect for human rights around the globe, or in any particular country, has not changed."James LaPorta contributed to this report.
