Supreme Court Update, Part 2

The paralegal workshops Washington DC offers are a great start for a striving paralegal, but don’t underestimate the importance of independent study. For soon-to-be paralegals, it is essential to stay knowledgeable of current events in U.S. law – and our paralegal blog is a good start.Paralegal Workshops Washington DC | Paralegal Institute
The Supreme Court recently ended its 2014 term.  As always, the final few weeks of the term were a flurry of activity.  A few of the most noteworthy decisions are recapped here (and in part one).

EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch (Decided June 1, 2015).  Amantha Elauf, a Muslim woman who wears a headscarf, applied to work at an Abercrombie & Fitch clothing store.  Abercrombie did not hire her, because her headscarf violated the Abercrombie “Look Policy.”  The “Look Policy” requires Abercrombie employees to dress in keeping with the style of store, prohibits black clothing, and bans “caps.”  On Elauf’s behalf, the EEOC argued Abercrombie violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which requires employers to provide employees with reasonable accommodations to aspects of religious practice.  An 8-1 majority of the Supreme Court agreed, holding that the does not simply require policies to be neutral to religious practices, but that the law creates an affirmative duty that employers accommodate religious practices.

Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project (Decided June 25, 2015).  The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, disability, or family status in housing decisions, unless the decision is made for an otherwise legitimate reason. In Dallas, a nonprofit accused the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs of causing segregated housing because the state officials made most federal low-income housing vouchers available in poor, minority neighborhoods rather than majority white suburbs.  The court noted that “race may be considered in certain circumstances and in the proper fashion,” holding that a Plaintiff does not need to show that the housing practice is intentionally discriminatory for the state action to violate the FHA.

As well as offering paralegal workshops Washington DC‘s striving paralegals have been utilizing for years, The Paralegal Institute strives to keep our paralegals knowledgeable through up-to-date news regarding United States law. To learn more, browse our blog, or read part one of the Supreme Court update.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *