|
Abstract: This casebook covers all major aspects of employment discrimination law, including benchmark legislative, administrative, and judicial developments. Due in part to frequent updates and revisions, it has received accolades as one of the most comprehensive and frequently updated texts on the market. The 15th Edition continues this tradition by seamlessly incorporating all major legislative and judicial developments through March 2026, including all relevant decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in its 2024-2025 term, with no major cases pending for the 2025-2026 term. There were two major Supreme Court rulings in the 2024-2025 term. One was in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, where a unanimous Court issued its latest ruling in an affirmative action/reverse discrimination case. The Court soundly rejected the defendant’s contention that a majority-group individual plaintiff in a reverse discrimination case should shoulder a heightened evidentiary burden to establish a prima facie case of intentional discrimination by showing background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority. Instead, the Court reiterated its adherence to the traditional McDonnell Douglas proof standard. The other was Stanley v. City of Sanford, where a seven member majority resolved the conflict as to whether a retired former employee who did not hold or seek a job when suit was filed was a “qualified individual” to bring suit under the ADA for an alleged act of discrimination that occurred during its term of employment. Focusing on the present tense of this statutory provision, the majority ruled that a retired former employee only has standing to challenge an employer action if the plaintiff held or desired to hold a job and could perform its essential functions at the time of the alleged act of discrimination.
|