Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States derives from the common law, and is codified in numerous state, federal, and local laws. These laws restrict discrimination based upon certain qualities or “secured categories”. The United States Constitution likewise prohibits discrimination by federal and state governments versus their public staff members. Discrimination in the economic sector is not straight constrained by the Constitution, however has actually become based on a growing body of federal and state law, consisting of the Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964. Federal law prohibits discrimination in a variety of areas, including recruiting, hiring, job assessments, promo policies, training, settlement and disciplinary action. State laws typically extend security to additional classifications or companies.

Under federal employment discrimination law, employers generally can not victimize workers on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (consisting of sexual preference and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] religion, [1] national origin, [1] special needs (physical or psychological, consisting of status), [5] [6] age (for employees over 40), [7] military service or affiliation, [8] bankruptcy or uncollectable bills, [9] genetic details, [10] and citizenship status (for citizens, long-term citizens, temporary homeowners, 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 employment 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 governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has an explicit requirement that the federal government does not deny individuals of “life, liberty, or property”, without due procedure of the law. It also contains an implicit warranty that the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly forbids states from breaking a person’s rights of due process and equal defense. In the employment context, these Constitutional provisions would restrict the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their work practices by treating staff members, former workers, or job applicants unequally due to the fact that of membership in a group (such as a race or sex). Due procedure defense needs that civil servant have a reasonable procedural procedure before they are terminated if the termination is related to a “liberty” (such as the right to totally free speech) or home interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the stipulation that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination costs (so they are not unconstitutional under Tenth Amendment) is Section 5 of Fourteenth Amendment.

Employment discrimination or harassment in the economic sector is not unconstitutional since Federal and most State Constitutions do not specifically provide their particular government the power to enact civil liberties laws that use to the private sector. The Federal government’s authority to control a personal organization, consisting of civil liberties laws, stems from their power to regulate 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 just deal with prejudiced treatment by the federal government, consisting of a public company.

Absent of a provision in a State Constitution, State civil liberties laws that manage the personal sector are typically Constitutional under the “authorities powers” doctrine or the power of a State to enact laws designed to protect public health, security and morals. All States need to abide by the Federal Civil liberty laws, but States might enact civil liberties laws that offer additional work security.

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

History of federal laws

Federal law governing employment discrimination has developed gradually.

The Equal Pay Act changed 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 restricts employers and unions from paying various salaries based upon sex. It does not prohibit other discriminatory practices in employing. It supplies that where employees carry out equal operate in the corner needing “equal skill, effort, and responsibility and carried out under similar working conditions,” they must be supplied equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act uses to companies taken part in some element of interstate commerce, or all of an employer’s employees if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a significant amount of interstate commerce. [citation required]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in much more elements of the employment relationship. “Title VII developed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act”. [12] It uses to the majority of companies engaged in interstate commerce with more than 15 workers, labor organizations, and employment firms. Title VII prohibits discrimination based on race, color, faith, sex or nationwide origin. It makes it unlawful for companies to discriminate based upon safeguarded characteristics regarding terms, conditions, and benefits of work. Employment agencies may not discriminate when hiring or referring candidates, and labor companies are also forbidden from basing membership or union classifications on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII in 1978, somalibidders.com specifying that illegal sex discrimination includes discrimination based on pregnancy, giving birth, and related 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 nationwide origin [and] requires affirmative action by federal specialists”. [14]

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and modified in 1978 and 1986, forbids employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The prohibited practices are almost identical to those described in Title VII, except that the ADEA protects employees in companies with 20 or more employees rather than 15 or more. A worker is secured from discrimination based on age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has phased out and restricted compulsory retirement, other than for high-powered decision-making positions (that also supply big pensions). The ADEA contains specific guidelines for advantage, pension and retirement plans. [7] Though ADEA is the center of a lot of discussion of age discrimination legislation, there is a longer history beginning with the abolishment of “maximum ages of entry into work in 1956” by the United States Civil Service Commission. Then in 1964, Executive Order 11141 “developed a policy against age discrimination among federal professionals”. [15]

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits work discrimination on the basis of special needs by the federal government, federal contractors with agreements of more than $10,000, and programs receiving federal monetary assistance. [16] It needs affirmative action in addition to non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 requires reasonable lodging, and Section 508 requires that electronic and info innovation be accessible to disabled employees. [16]

The Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972 forbids discrimination by mine operators versus 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 restricts employment discrimination on the basis of personal bankruptcy or uncollectable bills. [9]

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 forbids employers with more than 3 workers from victimizing anyone (other than an unauthorized immigrant) on the basis of nationwide origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to remove prejudiced barriers versus qualified people with disabilities, people with a record of a special needs, or people who are regarded as having a special needs. It prohibits discrimination based on real or viewed physical or mental specials needs. It also needs employers to supply affordable accommodations to workers who require them since of a disability to look for a task, carry out the necessary functions of a job, or delight in the benefits and benefits of work, unless the employer can show that undue difficulty will result. There are stringent limitations on when a company can ask disability-related questions or require medical assessments, and all medical info must be treated as private. A disability is specified under the ADA as a mental or physical health condition that “substantially restricts several major life activities. ” [5]

The Nineteenth Century Civil Liberty Acts, changed in 1993, make sure all individuals equivalent rights under the law and lay out the damages readily available to plaintiffs in actions brought under Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. [19] [20]

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 bars employers from utilizing individuals’ genetic info when making hiring, shooting, task positioning, or promo 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 [upgrade], 28 US states do not explicitly include sexual orientation and 29 US states do not explicitly consist of gender identity within anti-discrimination statutes.

LGBT work discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation 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 Employment Opportunity Commission (2020 ), work securities for LGBT people were patchwork; several states and regions explicitly prohibit harassment and predisposition 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) analyzed Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC’s determined that transgender workers were protected under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the defense to incorporate 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 kind of discrimination and harassment at the work environment. Moreover, a staggering 90 percent of transgender workers report some kind of harassment or mistreatment on the job.” Many individuals in the LGBT neighborhood have actually lost their task, including Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender lady who claims that her employer informed her that her presence might make other people feel unpleasant. [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 work environments. A couple of more states ban LGBT discrimination in just public work environments. [27] Some challengers of these laws believe that it would intrude on religious liberty, despite the fact that these laws are focused more on discriminatory actions, not beliefs. Courts have actually likewise recognized that these laws do not infringe complimentary speech or spiritual liberty. [28]

State law

State statutes likewise supply comprehensive protection from employment discrimination. Some laws extend comparable security as offered by the federal acts to companies who are not covered by those statutes. Other statutes supply defense to groups not covered by the federal acts. Some state laws provide greater defense to employees 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 just covers employees over 40.

In addition,

– District of Columbia – enlisting, individual appearance [35]- Michigan – height, weight [53]- Texas – Participation in emergency evacuation order [90]- Vermont – Place of birth [76]
Civil servant

Title VII likewise uses to state, federal, local and other public staff members. Employees of federal and state governments have extra defenses against work discrimination.

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

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

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

Exceptions

Authentic occupational certifications

Employers are usually enabled to consider qualities that would otherwise be inequitable if they are authentic occupational qualifications (BFOQ). The most common BFOQ is sex, and the second most common BFOQ is age. Authentic Occupational Qualifications can not be used for discrimination on the basis of race.

The only exception to this rule is demonstrated in a single case, Wittmer v. Peters, where the court guidelines that police surveillance can match races when needed. For example, if cops are running operations that involve private informants, or undercover agents, 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 proportionate to the community’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not apply in the home entertainment market, such as casting for films and tv. [95] Directors, producers and casting staff are allowed to cast characters based on physical qualities, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, and so on. Employment discrimination claims for Disparate Treatment are rare in the home entertainment industry, specifically in performers. [95] This justification is unique to the show business, and does not transfer to other markets, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, employers will utilize BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory work discrimination. BFOQ can not be an expense validation in wage spaces in between various groups of workers. [96] Cost can be considered when a company should balance personal privacy and security interest in the variety of positions that a company are trying to fill. [96]

Additionally, customer choice alone can not be a validation unless there is a personal privacy or safety defense. [96] For instance, retail establishments in backwoods can not prohibit African American clerks based on the racial ideologies of the customer base. But, matching genders for staffing at centers that deal with kids survivors of sexual abuse is allowed.

If an employer were attempting to prove that employment discrimination was based upon a BFOQ, there need to be an accurate basis for believing that all or considerably all members of a class would be unable to perform the job securely and effectively or that it is not practical to identify qualifications on an individualized basis. [97] Additionally, absence of a sinister motive does not transform a facially inequitable policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory impact. [97] Employers also bring the concern to reveal that a BFOQ is reasonably essential, and a lower inequitable alternative method does not exist. [98]

Religious employment discrimination

“Religious discrimination is treating individuals differently in their employment due to the fact that of their religion, their faiths and practices, and/or their ask for accommodation (a modification in an office guideline or policy) of their religions and practices. It likewise includes treating people in a different way in their employment since of their lack of faith or practice” (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, companies are restricted from declining to hire a private based on their religious beliefs- alike race, sex, age, and disability. If an employee thinks that they have experienced spiritual discrimination, they ought to resolve this to the alleged wrongdoer. On the other hand, staff members are protected by the law for reporting task discrimination and are able to submit charges with the EEOC. [100] Some areas in the U.S. now have provisions that prohibit discrimination against atheists. The courts and laws of the United States provide specific exemptions in these laws to companies or institutions that are religious or religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to varying degrees in various locations, depending on the setting and the context; some of these have been maintained and others reversed over time.

The most current and pervasive example of Religious Discrimination is the widespread rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many staff members are utilizing religions against changing the body and preventative medication as a validation to not receive the vaccination. Companies that do not enable employees to request spiritual exemptions, or decline their application might be charged by the staff member with work discrimination on the basis of spiritual beliefs. However, there are particular requirements for staff members to present proof that it is a genuinely held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 explicitly permits discrimination versus members of the Communist Party.

Military

The armed force has faced criticism for restricting females from serving in battle functions. In 2016, however, the law was modified to enable them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the article published on the PBS website, Henry Louis Gates Jr. discusses the method which black guys were dealt with in the military during the 1940s. According to Gates, throughout that time the whites offered the African Americans a chance to prove themselves as Americans by having them get involved in the war. The National Geographic site states, however, that when black soldiers signed up with the Navy, they were just permitted to work as servants; their involvement was limited to the functions of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans wished to protect the nation they resided in, they were rejected the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) secures the job rights of individuals who willingly or involuntarily leave work positions to carry out military service or specific kinds of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law likewise prohibits employers from discriminating versus staff members for previous or present involvement or subscription in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that give preference to veterans versus non-veterans has actually been declared to enforce systemic disparate treatment of females since there is a large underrepresentation of ladies in the . [106] The court has actually rejected this claim since there was no prejudiced intent towards ladies in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not straight discriminate versus a safeguarded classification might still be illegal if they produce a diverse effect on members of a secured group. Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 prohibits employment practices that have a prejudiced impact, unless they are associated to job performance.

The Act requires the removal of artificial, approximate, and unnecessary barriers to work that run invidiously to discriminate on the basis of race, and, referall.us if, as here, an employment practice that runs to omit Negroes can not be shown to be associated with task performance, it is forbidden, regardless of the company’s absence of discriminatory intent. [107]

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

When preventing a disparate effect claim that declares age discrimination, an employer, nevertheless, does not require to show need; rather, it must merely show that its practice is reasonable. [citation needed]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) analyzes and enforces 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 developed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement provisions are included in area 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its guidelines and standards are contained 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 tire their administrative remedies by filing an administrative grievance with the EEOC prior to submitting their suit in court. [113]

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

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, each company has and enforces its own regulations that use to its own programs and to any entities that get financial assistance. [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 on citizenship status or national origin. [115]

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

See also

Employment Non-Discrimination Act
LGBT work discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination against individuals with criminal records in the United States
Racial wage space in the United States
Gender pay gap 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 original 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 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 original 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 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 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 original on November 27, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)”. Archived from the initial on June 17, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2009.
^ Tilcsik, András (January 1, 2011). “Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination 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 predisposition against 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 initial on May 7, 2021. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ Lowndes, Coleman; Maza, Carlos (September 23, 2014). “The Top Five Myths About LGBT Non-Discrimination Laws Debunked”. Media Matters for America. Archived from the original on June 17, 2019. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
^ “Code of Alabama 25-1-21”. Archived from the 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 initial on December 6, 2022. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d e f “Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA)”. California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. CA.gov. 2010. Archived from the initial 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; Table of Contents, General Provisions” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 30, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Statutes & Constitution: View Statutes:-> 2008-> Ch0760-> Section 10: Online Sunshine”. www.leg.state.fl.us. Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Georgia Fair Employment Practices Act”. Archived from the original on January 29, 2010. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Hawaii Rev Statutes 378-2”. Archived from the 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 initial (PDF) on October 8, 2009.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:352”. Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:312”. Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:311”. Archived from the initial on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Title 5, 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 initial on June 4, 2010. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on December 26, 2014. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c “Minnesota Statutes, area 363A.08″. Archived from the original on September 6, 2015. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ ” § 213.055 R.S.Mo”. Archived from the initial on May 23, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b “Montana Code Annotated 49-2-303”. Archived from the original on September 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act”. Archived from the initial on November 26, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “NRS: CHAPTER 613 – EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES”. www.leg.state.nv.us. Archived from the initial 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 initial on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b “New York Labor Law Section 201-D – Discrimination against the engagement in certain activities. – New York Attorney Resources – New York 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 original (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 Attorney General|”. www.oag.ok.gov. Archived from the initial 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 original (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 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 hepatitis C infection”. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in employment 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 initial on November 3, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ Wyoming Code 27-9-105 [long-term dead link] ^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 3” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ “22 Guam Code Ann. Chapter 5” (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ a b “Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146”. Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Puerto Rico Laws PR 29-I-7-151″. Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451”. Archived from the original on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ “LABOR CODE CHAPTER 22. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION FOR 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 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 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 a company to discriminate in their employing practices based upon an Authentic Occupation Qualification?”. University of Cincinnati Law Review Blog. April 27, 2016. Archived from the initial on April 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ a b c “CM-625 Bona Fide 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 original 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). “Prepare yourself for more US ladies in combat”. CNN. Archived from the original on April 19, 2023. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ http://www.militaryaerospace.com/blogs/mil-aero-blog/2012/12/conspicuous-gallantry-doris-miller-at-pearl-harbor-was-one-of-world-war-ii-s-first-heroes.html Archived May 30, 2023, at the Wayback Machine [1] ^ Gates, Henry Louis; Root, Jr|Originally published on The (January 14, 2013). “Segregation in the Army During The Second World War|African American History Blog”. The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross. Archived from the initial on June 21, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ a b “USERRA – Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act”. DOL. Archived from the 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 original on December 18, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ “FindLaw’s United States Supreme Court case and viewpoints”. Findlaw. Archived from the initial 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 Leading to the Creation of EEOC”. Archived from the initial 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 original 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.
^ “A Summary 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 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 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.