Documents

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Catastrophe Management Solutions Documents 1-14-15

AC Brief

Download

Case Attorneys

Meriem L. Hubbard

Senior Attorney

Meriem Hubbard has been an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation since January 2000.  She litigates cases involving property rights, public finance issues, and preferences in government hiring, contracting, and education. … ›

View profile

Joshua P. Thompson

Senior Attorney

Joshua Thompson joined Pacific Legal Foundation in August 2007. He primarily litigates cases involving equality under the law, economic liberty, school choice, and coastal land rights. Joshua was raised in … ›

View profile

Case Commentary

See all posts
Post

By James S. Burling

Weekly litigation update — September 17, 2016

  • First Amendment challenge to ban on automobile “For Sale” signs
  • EEOC gets a haircut
  • Petition for rehearing denied in Florida takings case
  • Amicus brief filed in support of right to earn a living

First Amendment challenge to ban on automobile “For Sale” signs

We filed this complaint in Cefali v San Juan Capistrano, challenging that town’s ban on automobile “For Sale” signs When law student Michael Cefali tried to sell his Volkswagen by parking it front of his home with a “For Sale” sign, he didn’t receive an offer; instead he received a $50 ticket Michael had the good fortune, however, of being a student in PLF’s Read more

Post

By Joshua P. Thompson

EEOC loses its hairstyle discrimination case

Earlier today, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s lawsuit against Catastrophe Management Solutions This an important decision concerning the proper scope of Title VII At issue was whether a business’s policy requiring professional-looking haircuts — and interpreted to prohibit dreadlocks —  facially violates Title VII’s prohibition on intentional racial discrimination in employment Because the Court found that Title VII only prohibits discrimination based on immutable characteristics, it affirmed the dismissal of the lawsuit (more…)

Read more
Post

By Joshua P. Thompson

Why hairstyle requirements don't violate Title VII in one sentence

In EEOC v Catastrophe Management Solutions, Inc, the federal government is claiming that a business’s decision to ban dreadlocks in the workplace violates Title VII’s requirement that the workplace be free of racial discrimination Briefing was completed long ago, and PLF filed an amicus brief in the case arguing that requiring professional-looking haircuts does not amount to racial discrimination

Last week, the EEOC filed a supplemental authority letter arguing that new evidence has come to light demonstrating that the business’s dreadlocks ban does, in fact, violate Title VII Its evidence was a new policy adopted by the Marines that allows women Marines to wear locks in their hair Today,

Read more