Section Newsletters

Articles on Discrimination

ISBA Assembly supports U.S. ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)—What happens next? By Annemarie E. Kill Diversity Leadership Council, June 2011 The ISBA has taken a lead as one of the few bar associations to pass a formal resolution in support of CEDAW.
Motor carrier defeats HIV-positive driver’s ADA and related claims By William D. Brejcha Energy, Utilities, Telecommunications, and Transportation, June 2011 The case of EEOC v. C.R. England, Inc. will be helpful to motor carriers and others as it answers some fundamental questions that arise from the ADA statute which have not been previously addressed in detail by the courts.
Title II of GINA and the EEOC regulations By Ambrose V. McCall Labor and Employment Law, June 2011 A brief overview of some of the legislative and regulatory highlights of the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act.
Mid-Year Assembly votes to support CEDAW By Julie A. Neubauer Women and the Law, April 2011 The ISBA Assembly voted overwhelmingly, but not unanimously, to stand in support of the US ratification of CEDAW.
Plaintiff’s uncorroborated testimony wards off summary judgment By Michael R. Lied Labor and Employment Law, March 2011 If based on personal knowledge or experience, uncorroborated testimony can create disputed material facts. Courts at summary judgment stage should not weigh the evidence or determine the credibility of the testimony; those tasks are for the fact finder.
The Supreme Court and retaliation in the “zone of interests”: Thompson v. North American Stainless By Stephen E. Balogh & Adam B.E. Lied Labor and Employment Law, March 2011 Thompson filed a retaliation claim against his employer, American Stainless, alleging that he had been fired in retaliation because his fiance, also employed by American Stainless, had complained about sex discrimination.
Fiscal Bite & Breed Discrimination: Utilizing Scientific Advances & Economic Tools in Lobbying, Part III By Ledy VanKavage & John Dunham Animal Law, December 2010 The majority of breed-discriminatory laws result from high-profile dog bites or attacks.
In-sites Government Lawyers, December 2010 A listing of Web sites relating to non-discrimination laws.
Fiscal bite & breed discrimination: Utilizing scientific advances & economic tools in lobbying, Part II By Ledy VanKavage & John Dunham Animal Law, November 2010 The majority of breed-discriminatory laws result from high-profile dog bites or attacks.
The CEDAW debate By Mark E. Wojcik Human and Civil Rights, October 2010 The question of whether the ISBA should support ratification of CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women) is slated to come before the ISBA Assembly on Saturday morning, December 11, 2010. The proceedings are open to all ISBA members and other members of the public.
Workplace discrimination: A primer on gathering evidence By Peter LaSorsa Human and Civil Rights, October 2010 A look at what types of evidence may exist in workplace discrimination cases and how best to obtain that evidence.
Representing gender-variant people in claims of employment discrimination by private employers By Joanie Rae Wimmer Labor and Employment Law, July 2010 The law in this area is rapidly developing and in flux. And because of applicable fee-shifting statutes, representing gender variant people in employment discrimination claims is an opportunity for Illinois practitioners both to work in an exciting and developing area of the law, and, to be compensated adequately for their work.
Fiscal bite & breed discrimination: Utilizing scientific advances & economic tools in lobbying, Part I By Ledy VanKavage & John Dunham Animal Law, June 2010 The majority of breed-discriminatory laws result from high-profile dog bites or attacks.
Common-law tort and federal anti-discrimination claims not preempted by Illinois Human Rights Act By Michael R. Lied Labor and Employment Law, January 2010 The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the appellate court, and remanded to the appellate court to consider defendant’s other claims of error. 
The City of Chicago renews its commitment to minority and women-owned businesses By Daniel R. Saeedi Racial and Ethnic Minorities and the Law, November 2009 The City of Chicago has recently renewed its Minority and Women Business Enterprise Program, an affirmative action program in construction with goals for awarding 24% of City construction contracts to Minority-owned Business Enterprises and 4% to Women-owned Business Enterprises. 
How far have we come in eradicating discrimination in our profession and what is the blueprint for the future? By Sharon L. Eiseman Racial and Ethnic Minorities and the Law, November 2009 Like any occupation, the legal profession has not been immune from workplace problems like discrimination, hostile environment, harassment and retaliation
Civility and religious sensitivity By Andrea M. Schleifer Bench and Bar, April 2009 Almost 75 years ago, the Decalogue Society of Lawyers was created to among other things, confront anti-Semitism and discrimination encountered by Jewish attorneys in the Courts. Unfortunately, at that time, many judges would knowingly schedule trials on Jewish holidays without compunction. That rarely happens today, when most judges respect the religious requirements of litigants and lawyers.
Employer loses insurance coverage for failure to timely report a claim of discrimination By Michael R. Lied Labor and Employment Law, September 2008 The lesson here? Read your policy requirements. Arrowood Indemnity Co. refused to defend Westrec Marine Management Co., because Westrec failed to timely report a claim of discrimination.
Employers beware: Illinois gives employees ticket to take discrimination claims to state court By Ellen M. Girard Corporate Law Departments, February 2008 Major amendments to the Illinois Human Rights Act (“Act”) will give complainants the choice of taking their Illinois Department of Human Rights (“IDHR”) charges on to Illinois circuit courts – regardless of the outcome at the IDHR. Previously, complainants could only proceed before the Illinois Human Rights Commission (the “Commission”) – but only in cases where the IDHR found substantial evidence or did not timely complete its investigation.
Recent developments under Batson By Kathryn R. Hoying Civil Practice and Procedure, June 2007 In the matter of Mack v. Anderson, the appellate court addressed the seminal case on the prohibition against racial discrimination in jury selection, Batson v. Kentucky, and reversed the trial court’s denial of plaintiffs’ Batson motion.
Sexual orientation discrimination in the workplace By James E. Snyder & Hon. Reva S. Bauch Labor and Employment Law, June 2007 Imagine being called into your employer’s boardroom and being told: “You’re a great employee, but you’re gay, so...you’re fired!” Federal law does not prohibit this kind of conduct by the employer. And in 33 states it is not an unlawful employment practice. In Illinois and 16 other states and the District of Columbia, however, it is illegal for an employer to fire an otherwise competent employee because of his or her sexual orientation.
Smith v. City of Jackson: A hollow victory in age discrimination cases By Kristi Vetri Elder Law, June 2007 Two years ago, a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of 5-3, made it easier for employees to bring lawsuits under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Pub. L. No. 90-202, 81 Stat. 602 (Dec. 15, 1967), codified as Chapter 14 of Title 29 of the United States Code, 29 U.S.C. § 621 through 29 U.S.C. § 634 (ADEA) by holding that they may bring disparate impact claims under the Act.
Sexual orientation charges under the Illinois Human Rights Act—A preliminary analysis of the “sexual orientation” discrimination charges filed in the first eight months of the amended Illinois statute By Mark E. Wojcik Human and Civil Rights, November 2006 Discrimination based on sexual orientation became illegal statewide in Illinois on January 1, 2006, when the long-sought “sexual orientation” amendment to the Illinois Human Rights Act entered into effect.
Seventh Circuit rules that Cash Balance Plans are not age discriminatory; Second, Third, and Ninth Circuits could follow By Peter M. Varney & David R. Godofsky Employee Benefits, September 2006 Rejecting resoundingly a theory that has spawned lawsuits in federal district courts from coast to coast, the Seventh Circuit held that defined benefit plans employing a “cash balance” formula do not violate ERISA’s prohibition on age discrimination.
A discrimination lawsuit filed by an individual in a protected class who alleges adverse employment action may proceed even though the individual’s replacement is a person in the same protected class By Paul E. Freehling Labor and Employment Law, January 2006 Suppose P, a person in a protected class, alleges that an adverse employment action—such as discharge, failure to hire, demotion, or failure to promote—resulted from, for example, age, disability, gender, national origin, pregnancy, racial or religious bias.
Faulty release fails to bar age discrimination claims By Michael R. Lied Labor and Employment Law, January 2006 In Kruchowski, et al. v. Weyerhaeuser Co., the group of plaintiffs signed a release of claims, in order to obtain a severance package.
When a performance evaluation is the product of discrimination, has there been an “adverse employment action”? By Paul E. Freehling Labor and Employment Law, July 2005 For over a decade, the federal judiciary has been grappling with the following question: Under what circumstances, if any, does a less-than-stellar performance evaluation given as a result of unlawful discrimination constitute "adverse employment action" as contemplated by the anti-discrimination statutes and the Due Process Clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments?
General Dynamics Land Systems v. Cline: U.S. Supreme Court turns back reverse discrimination claim By June M. McKoy Elder Law, March 2005 The General Dynamics Land Systems decision was handed down by the United States Supreme Court on February 24, 2004, effectively closing the door on a Sixth Circuit decision that had provided a portal to reverse discrimination claims under the Age Discrimination and Employment Act (hereinafter "ADEA").
Wachovia Corporation will pay $5.5M for compensation discrimination By Michael R. Lied Labor and Employment Law, February 2005 The United States Department of Labor, Office of the Federal Contract Compliance Programs, undertook a corporate management review of the headquarters of First Union National Bank in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Supreme Court rules ADEA does not prohibit reverse age discrimination By Kyle Brown Corporate Law Departments, August 2004 The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) does not prohibit employment or benefit practices that favor older workers over younger workers, even when the younger workers fall within the ADEA's protected class

Select a Different Subject