Employment Discrimination Law in The United States

Employment discrimination law in the United States stems from the common law, and is codified in numerous state, federal, and local laws. These laws restrict discrimination based upon certain characteristics or „protected classifications“. The United States Constitution likewise restricts discrimination by federal and state federal governments against their public staff members. Discrimination in the personal sector is not directly 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 Rights Act of 1964. Federal law prohibits discrimination in a number of areas, including recruiting, employing, job evaluations, promotion policies, training, payment and disciplinary action. State laws frequently extend defense to additional classifications or employers.

Under federal employment discrimination law, companies normally can not discriminate versus staff members on the basis of race, [1] sex [1] [2] (including sexual orientation and gender identity), [3] pregnancy, [4] religion, [1] national origin, [1] needs (physical or psychological, consisting of status), [5] [6] age (for employees over 40), [7] military service or affiliation, [8] insolvency or bad debts, [9] hereditary information, [10] and citizenship status (for people, long-term citizens, short-term citizens, 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 Rights Act of 1964

Title IX

Constitutional basis

The United States Constitution does not directly resolve employment discrimination, but 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 limit the power of the federal and state governments to discriminate. The Fifth Amendment has an explicit requirement that the federal government does not deprive individuals of „life, liberty, or residential or commercial property“, without due process of the law. It likewise includes an implicit warranty that the Fourteenth Amendment clearly prohibits states from breaking a person’s rights of due procedure and equivalent defense. In the work context, these Constitutional arrangements would limit the right of the state and federal governments to discriminate in their work practices by dealing with staff members, previous staff members, or job candidates unequally since of subscription in a group (such as a race or sex). Due process protection requires that civil servant have a fair procedural process before they are ended if the termination is related to a „liberty“ (such as the right to totally free speech) or property interest. As both Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses are passive, the provision that empowers Congress to pass anti-discrimination bills (so they are not unconstitutional under Tenth Amendment) is Section 5 of Fourteenth Amendment.

Employment discrimination or harassment in the private sector is not unconstitutional since Federal and most State Constitutions do not specifically provide their respective federal government the power to enact civil liberties laws that apply to the personal sector. The Federal government’s authority to regulate a personal company, consisting of civil rights laws, originates from their power to regulate all commerce in between the States. Some State Constitutions do specifically manage some security from public and private employment discrimination, such as Article I of the California Constitution. However, most State Constitutions only resolve prejudiced treatment by the federal government, consisting of a public company.

Absent of an arrangement in a State Constitution, State civil rights laws that control the private sector are usually Constitutional under the „authorities powers“ doctrine or the power of a State to enact laws designed to secure public health, security and morals. All States must abide by the Federal Civil liberty laws, but States might enact civil liberties laws that provide additional employment defense.

For adremcareers.com instance, some State civil rights laws use protection from employment discrimination on the basis of political association, despite the fact that such forms of discrimination are not yet covered in federal civil liberties laws.

History of federal laws

Federal law governing employment discrimination has developed with time.

The Equal Pay Act amended the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1963. It is implemented by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor. [12] The Equal Pay Act forbids companies and unions from paying different salaries based on sex. It does not restrict other discriminatory practices in working with. It provides that where workers carry out equal operate in the corner requiring „equal ability, effort, and obligation and carried out under similar working conditions,“ they need to be supplied equal pay. [2] The Fair Labor Standards Act applies to employers taken part in some element of interstate commerce, or all of a company’s workers if the enterprise is engaged as a whole in a substantial amount of interstate commerce. [citation needed]

Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in many more aspects of the employment relationship. „Title VII created the Equal Job opportunity Commission (EEOC) to administer the act“. [12] It uses to a lot of employers taken part in interstate commerce with more than 15 staff members, labor organizations, and employment service. Title VII prohibits discrimination based upon race, color, religion, sex or national origin. It makes it illegal for companies to discriminate based upon protected qualities relating to terms, conditions, and advantages of employment. Employment agencies may not discriminate when employing or referring candidates, and labor organizations are likewise forbidden from basing subscription or union categories on race, color, religion, sex, or nationwide origin. [1] The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII in 1978, specifying that illegal sex discrimination includes discrimination based upon pregnancy, giving birth, and related medical conditions. [4] An associated statute, the Family and Medical Leave Act, sets requirements governing leave for pregnancy and wiki.eqoarevival.com pregnancy-related conditions. [13]

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

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), enacted in 1968 and changed in 1978 and 1986, forbids employers from discriminating on the basis of age. The restricted practices are nearly similar to those described in Title VII, other than that the ADEA protects workers in firms with 20 or more employees rather than 15 or more. A staff member is secured from discrimination based on age if she or he is over 40. Since 1978, the ADEA has actually phased out and restricted compulsory retirement, except for high-powered decision-making positions (that likewise supply large pensions). The ADEA includes explicit guidelines for advantage, pension and retirement strategies. [7] Though ADEA is the center of many conversation 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 restricts work discrimination on the basis of impairment by the federal government, federal professionals with contracts of more than $10,000, and programs getting federal monetary help. [16] It needs affirmative action as well as non-discrimination. [16] Section 504 needs reasonable lodging, and Section 508 requires that electronic and details innovation be accessible to handicapped workers. [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 „needs affirmative action for disabled and Vietnam period veterans by federal specialists“. [14]

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

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 prohibits employers with more than three staff members from victimizing anybody (except an unapproved immigrant) on the basis of nationwide origin or citizenship status. [18]

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted to remove prejudiced barriers against qualified people with specials needs, people with a record of an impairment, or people who are regarded as having a disability. It restricts discrimination based on real or viewed physical or psychological specials needs. It likewise requires employers to supply affordable accommodations to employees who require them due to the fact that of an impairment to request a task, perform the important functions of a job, or enjoy the advantages and privileges of work, unless the employer can show that excessive difficulty will result. There are rigorous restrictions on when a company can ask disability-related concerns or require medical checkups, and all medical details must be dealt with as confidential. An impairment is defined under the ADA as a psychological or physical health condition that „significantly restricts several major life activities. “ [5]

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

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 bars companies from using people’ hereditary information when making hiring, shooting, task placement, 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 [upgrade], 28 US states do not clearly consist of sexual preference and 29 US states do not clearly include gender identity within anti-discrimination statutes.

LGBT employment discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids work discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. This is included by the law’s prohibition of employment 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 ), work defenses for LGBT individuals were patchwork; several states and areas explicitly forbid harassment and predisposition in work choices on the basis of sexual preference and/or gender identity, although some only cover public workers. [22] Prior to the Bostock choice, the Equal Job Opportunity Commission (EEOC) analyzed Title VII to cover LGBT employees; the EEOC’s determined that transgender staff members were secured under Title VII in 2012, [23] and extended the defense to encompass sexual preference in 2015. [24] [25]

According to Crosby Burns and Jeff Krehely: „Studies reveal that anywhere from 15 percent to 43 percent of gay individuals have experienced some type 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 task.“ Many individuals in the LGBT neighborhood have actually lost their job, including Vandy Beth Glenn, a transgender lady who claims that her employer told her that her existence may make other people feel unpleasant. [26]

Almost half of the United States also have state-level or municipal-level laws prohibiting the discrimination of gender non-conforming and transgender people in both public and private work environments. A few more states prohibit LGBT discrimination in only public workplaces. [27] Some opponents of these laws think that it would invade spiritual liberty, despite the fact that these laws are focused more on inequitable actions, not beliefs. Courts have actually also identified that these laws do not infringe free speech or spiritual liberty. [28]

State law

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

The following table lists categories not secured by federal law. Age is included too, since federal law just covers employees over 40.

In addition,

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

Title VII likewise uses to state, federal, local and other public workers. Employees of federal and state federal governments have additional securities against employment discrimination.

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

Additionally, public workers keep their First Amendment rights, whereas private companies have the right to limits employees’ speech in particular ways. [93] Public workers retain 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 issue, and their speech is not interfering with their job. [93]

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

Exceptions

Bona fide occupational credentials

Employers are normally permitted to consider qualities that would otherwise be inequitable if they are bona fide occupational credentials (BFOQ). The most common BFOQ is sex, and the second most common 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 demonstrated in a single case, Wittmer v. Peters, where the court guidelines that police security can match races when needed. For example, if cops are running operations that include personal informants, or undercover agents, sending an African American officer into a sting for a KKK white supremacy group. Additionally, authorities departments, such as the department in Ferguson, Missouri, can think about race-based policing and work with officers that are proportionate to the neighborhood’s racial makeup. [94]

BFOQs do not use in the entertainment industry, such as casting for movies and tv. [95] Directors, manufacturers and casting personnel are permitted to cast characters based upon physical characteristics, such as race, sex, hair color, eye color, weight, etc. Employment discrimination declares for Disparate Treatment are rare in the home entertainment market, particularly in entertainers. [95] This reason is unique to the show business, library.kemu.ac.ke and does not move to other industries, such as retail or food. [95]

Often, employers will use BFOQ as a defense to a Disparate Treatment theory employment discrimination. BFOQ can not be an expense justification in wage gaps in between different groups of staff members. [96] Cost can be thought about when a company must stabilize personal privacy and security interest in the variety of positions that an employer are attempting to fill. [96]

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

If a company were trying to prove that work discrimination was based upon a BFOQ, there should be a factual basis for believing that all or significantly all members of a class would be not able to carry out the job safely and efficiently or that it is not practical to identify qualifications on a personalized basis. [97] Additionally, absence of a malicious intention does not transform a facially discriminatory policy into a neutral policy with an inequitable impact. [97] Employers likewise bring the burden to reveal that a BFOQ is reasonably essential, and a lesser inequitable option method does not exist. [98]

Religious employment discrimination

„Religious discrimination is treating individuals differently in their employment because of their religion, their faiths and practices, and/or their demand for lodging (a modification in a work environment rule or policy) of their religions and practices. It likewise includes treating individuals in a different way in their work due to the fact that of their absence of faith or practice“ (Workplace Fairness). [99] According to The U.S. Equal Job Opportunity Commission, employers are restricted from declining to hire an individual based on their faith- alike race, sex, age, and disability. If an employee thinks that they have actually experienced religious discrimination, they must 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 file charges with the EEOC. [100] Some locations in the U.S. now have stipulations that ban discrimination versus atheists. The courts and laws of the United States offer certain exemptions in these laws to services or institutions that are religious or religiously-affiliated, nevertheless, to differing degrees in different locations, depending upon the setting and the context; some of these have been supported and others reversed gradually.

The most recent and prevalent example of Religious Discrimination is the widespread rejection of the COVID-19 Vaccine. Many employees are utilizing religions against modifying the body and preventative medicine as a justification to not get the vaccination. Companies that do not enable staff members to request religious exemptions, or decline their application might be charged by the worker with employment discrimination on the basis of spiritual beliefs. However, there are certain requirements for staff members to present proof that it is a sincerely held belief. [101]

Members of the Communist Party

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

Military

The armed force has faced criticism for forbiding females from serving in fight functions. In 2016, however, the law was changed to enable them to serve. [102] [103] [104] In the short article published on the PBS website, Henry Louis Gates Jr. blogs about the method in which black guys were dealt with in the military throughout the 1940s. According to Gates, throughout that time the whites gave the African Americans an opportunity to show themselves as Americans by having them take part in the war. The National Geographic website states, however, that when black soldiers joined the Navy, they were just permitted to work as servants; their participation was restricted to the functions of mess attendants, stewards, and cooks. Even when African Americans wanted to protect the nation they lived in, they were denied the power to do so.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) safeguards the task rights of people who voluntarily or involuntarily leave employment positions to carry out military service or certain kinds of service in the National Disaster Medical System. [105] The law also restricts employers from discriminating versus employees for previous or present participation or subscription in the uniformed services. [105] Policies that give preference to veterans versus non-veterans has been declared to impose systemic disparate treatment of ladies since there is a large underrepresentation of women in the uniformed services. [106] The court has rejected this claim since there was no inequitable intent towards ladies in this veteran friendly policy. [106]

Unintentional discrimination

Employment practices that do not directly discriminate versus a protected classification may still be illegal if they produce a diverse impact on members of a protected group. Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964 restricts employment practices that have an inequitable effect, unless they belong to task performance.

The Act requires the removal of artificial, arbitrary, and unneeded barriers to work 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 job efficiency, it is prohibited, notwithstanding the employer’s absence of prejudiced intent. [107]

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

When defending versus a disparate effect claim that declares age discrimination, a company, nevertheless, does not need to demonstrate need; rather, it should simply reveal that its practice is reasonable. [citation required]

Enforcing entities

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) translates and implements the Equal Pay Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII of the Civil Liberty Act of 1964, Title I and V of the Americans With Disabilities Act, Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Civil Rights Act of 1991. [109] The Commission was developed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [110] Its enforcement provisions are included in section 2000e-5 of Title 42, [111] and its guidelines and guidelines are contained in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1614. [112] Persons wishing to submit match under Title VII and/or the ADA should tire their administrative treatments by filing an administrative complaint with the EEOC prior to submitting their claim in court. [113]

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

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

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) enforces the anti-discrimination provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b, which prohibits discrimination based on citizenship status or national origin. [115]

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

Employment Non-Discrimination Act
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States
Employment discrimination against persons with rap sheets in the United States
Racial wage gap in the United States
Gender pay space in the United States
Criticism of credit rating systems in the United States

References

^ a b c d e „Title VII of the Civil Rights 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 original 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 original on December 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „Questions and Answers: The Americans with Disabilities Act and Persons with HIV/AIDS“. Archived from the 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 original 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 initial 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 original 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 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 initial on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Carpenter, Dale (December 14, 2012). „Anti-gay discrimination is sex discrimination, says the EEOC“. The Washington Post. Archived from the initial on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 17, 2015.
^ Tatectate, Curtis. „EEOC: Federal law prohibits office predisposition against gays, lesbians, bisexuals|Miami Herald Miami Herald“. Miamiherald.com. Archived from the initial 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 initial 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 original 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 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 original 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 initial on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „Georgia Fair Employment Practices Act“. Archived from the original on January 29, 2010. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b „Hawaii Rev Statutes 378-2“. Archived from the original 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 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 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 initial on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:311“. Archived from the initial on May 9, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „Title 5, Chapter 337: HUMAN RIGHTS ACT“. www.mainelegislature.org. Archived from the 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 initial on December 26, 2014. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c „Minnesota Statutes, area 363A.08″. Archived from the initial 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 original on November 26, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b „NRS: CHAPTER 613 – EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES“. www.leg.state.nv.us. Archived from the original on December 24, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b „Section 354-A:7 Unlawful Discriminatory Practices“. Archived from the 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 State Executive Law, Article 15, Section 296“. Archived from the initial on October 4, 2011. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ a b „New york city Labor Law Section 201-D – Discrimination versus the engagement in particular activities. – New York City 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 original 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 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). [long-term dead link] ^ „State of Rhode Island General Assembly“. www.rilegislature.gov. Archived from the original 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 initial 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 initial on July 21, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b „Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act“ (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on June 1, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009.
^ „Virginia Human Rights Act“. Archived from the original on December 26, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b „RCW 49.60.180: Unfair practices of companies“. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the original on November 29, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „RCW 49.60.172: Unfair practices with 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 perceived HIV or liver disease C infection“. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 20, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „RCW 49.44.090: Unfair practices in employment since of age of staff member or applicant-Exceptions“. apps.leg.wa.gov. Archived from the initial on April 19, 2023. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „State of West Virginia“ (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ a b c d „Wisconsin Statutes 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 original (PDF) on July 19, 2011. Retrieved July 29, 2009.
^ a b „Puerto Rico Laws 29-I-7-146“. Archived from the initial on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „Puerto Rico Laws PR 29-I-7-151“. Archived from the original on February 20, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „Virgin Islands Code on Employment Discrimination § 451“. Archived from the original on February 16, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2023.
^ „LABOR CODE CHAPTER 22. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION FOR TAKING PART IN EMERGENCY EVACUATION“. statutes.capitol.texas.gov. Archived from the 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 initial on April 20, 2023.
^ a b „Federal Employee Speech & the First Amendment|ACLU of DC“. www.acludc.org. November 9, 2017. Archived from the original on September 21, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ „Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri“. www.justice.gov. March 4, 2015. Archived from the original 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 original 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 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 initial on March 5, 2020. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ „Sincerely Held or Suddenly Held Religious Exemptions to Vaccination?“. www.americanbar.org. Archived from the original on December 19, 2023. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
^ Thom Patterson (November 10, 2016). „Prepare yourself 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 published on The (January 14, 2013). „Segregation in the Armed Forces During The Second World War|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 opinions“. Findlaw. Archived from the original on August 25, 2019. Retrieved August 20, 2019.
^ „Shaping Employment Discrimination Law“. Archived from the original on May 11, 2009. Retrieved July 28, 2009.
^ „Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws“. Archived from the initial 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 EMPLOYMENT 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 original on August 2, 2009. Retrieved August 1, 2009.
^ „An Introduction of the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices“. Archived from the 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 Employment 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 secure older employees. Weak to start with, she states 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.