<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with Discrimination and scotus</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/Discrimination+scotus</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'Discrimination' and 'scotus' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 06:44:58 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 06:44:58 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>This is why we can&apos;t have nice things.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/111583/This%2Dis%2Dwhy%2Dwe%2Dcant%2Dhave%2Dnice%2Dthings</link>
		<description> Unanimous SCOTUS ruling: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pewforum.org/Church-State-Law/The-Supreme-Court-Takes-Up-Church-Employment-Disputes-and-the-%E2%80%9CMinisterial-Exception%E2%80%9D.aspx&quot;&gt;Anti-discrimination laws (such as the ADA) do not apply to church employees with religious duties.&lt;/a&gt; Full ruling: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-553.pdf&quot;&gt;PDF&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:F7_VEv7ostwJ:www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-553.pdf+&amp;cd=1&amp;hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&amp;gl=us&amp;client=firefox-a&quot;&gt;HTML&lt;/a&gt;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2012:site.111583</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 06:44:58 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>ada</category>
		<category>churchvsstate</category>
		<category>discrimination</category>
		<category>eeoc</category>
		<category>firstamendment</category>
		<category>scotus</category>
		<category>supremecourt</category>
		<dc:creator>Evilspork</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>By The Content Of Their Character</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/82881/By%2DThe%2DContent%2DOf%2DTheir%2DCharacter</link>
		<description> Today, on the last day of this year&apos;s term, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-1428.pdf&quot;&gt;opinion&lt;/a&gt; in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/07-08/07-1428_Petitioner.pdf&quot;&gt;Ricci&lt;/a&gt; v. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/07-08/08-328_Respondent.pdf&quot;&gt;DeStefano&lt;/a&gt;, the latest in the Court&apos;s line of decisions on &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.elinfonet.com/titleVIIsum.php&quot;&gt;Title VII&lt;/a&gt; and the role of race in employment decisions.  The famous case centers on white firefighters&apos; claims of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.slate.com/id/2221250/entry/2221252/&quot;&gt;race discrimination&lt;/a&gt; following the town of New Haven&apos;s decision to scuttle a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200906291832dowjonesdjonline000639&amp;title=details-of-new-haven-conn-firefighting-exam&quot;&gt;promotion exam&lt;/a&gt; after white test takers performed disproportionately better than black firefighters. The case has been covered extensively in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.volokh.com/posts/chain_1213653276.shtml&quot;&gt;blogs&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.npr.org/blogs/politicaljunkie/2009/06/court_rules_in_favor_of_white.html&quot;&gt;mainstream&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ctemploymentlawblog.com/tags/ricci-v-destefano/&quot;&gt;local&lt;/a&gt; media.  In addition to the high-stakes questions at issue in the case itself, Supreme Court &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/what-ricci-says-about-the-supreme-courts-views-of-judge-sotomayor/&quot;&gt;nominee&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/06/29/ricci-what-would-sotomayor-have-done/&quot;&gt;Sonia Sotomayor&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.slate.com/id/2219037/&quot;&gt;sat&lt;/a&gt; on the panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that &lt;a href=&quot;http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/ricci-secondcircuit-2007.pdf&quot;&gt;summarily decided&lt;/a&gt; the case at the intermediate appellate level. </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2009:site.82881</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:28:48 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>AffirmativeAction</category>
		<category>Constitution</category>
		<category>Discrimination</category>
		<category>IdentityPolitics</category>
		<category>Law</category>
		<category>newhaven</category>
		<category>Race</category>
		<category>ricci</category>
		<category>scotus</category>
		<category>sotomayor</category>
		<category>supremecourt</category>
		<category>TitleVII</category>
		<dc:creator>Law Talkin&apos; Guy</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Rumsfeld v. FAIR</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/47370/Rumsfeld%2Dv%2DFAIR</link>
		<description> The Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/People/SecDef/&quot;&gt;Rumsfeld&lt;/a&gt; v. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.law.georgetown.edu/solomon/&quot;&gt;FAIR&lt;/a&gt;, a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.law.duke.edu/publiclaw/supremecourtonline/certgrants/2005/rumvfor.html&quot;&gt;case&lt;/a&gt; challenging the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.yalerotc.org/Solomon.html&quot;&gt;Solomon Amendment&lt;/a&gt;, a US federal law that allows the government to cut federal funding to universities that refuse to allow military recruiting on campus.  FAIR is a coalition of law schools challenging this law on the basis that the US military&apos;s policy of prohibiting &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gordon.army.mil/osja/armypol.htm&quot;&gt;open homosexuals&lt;/a&gt; from serving violates the schools&apos; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aals.org/about_handbook_requirements.php&quot;&gt;anti-discrimination policies&lt;/a&gt; (see section 6-3).  Summing the issue up nicely, the dean of one law school &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051207/NEWS01/512070311/1079&quot;&gt;said of the US military&lt;/a&gt;, &quot;If it were a private employer who discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation, race or gender, we wouldn&apos;t allow them here on campus.&quot;   .rm C-SPAN coverage &lt;a href=&quot;rtsp://video.c-span.org/archive/sc/sc120605_rumsfeld.rm&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2005:site.47370</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2005 17:16:38 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>discrimination</category>
		<category>fair</category>
		<category>homosexuality</category>
		<category>lawschool</category>
		<category>military</category>
		<category>rotc</category>
		<category>rumsfeld</category>
		<category>scotus</category>
		<category>supremecourt</category>
		<category>USA</category>
		<dc:creator>thirteenkiller</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Taking the Long View</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/36742/Taking%2Dthe%2DLong%2DView</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/loving.html"&gt;Only in 1967 did &lt;i&gt;Loving v. Virginia&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/a&gt; overturn vigorously-enforced laws against interracial marriage in these 15 states--Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.  Only in 1964 did the &lt;a href=&quot;http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/civilr19.htm&quot;&gt;Civil Rights Act&lt;/a&gt; overturn laws against equal access to voting, public accommodation, and public education.  Only in 1963 did the &lt;a href=&quot;http://nc.essortment.com/equalpayact_rvwx.htm&quot;&gt;Equal Pay Act&lt;/a&gt; mandate that men and women be paid the same wage for the same work at the same job.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/History/TheCentury_NationsView.html&quot;&gt;History&lt;/a&gt;  isn&apos;t a superhighway, leading us in straight lines toward utopia.  We &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bartleby.com/65/mc/McCarthyJR.html&quot;&gt;fall back&lt;/a&gt; and we &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/library/mlking.htm&quot;&gt;move forward&lt;/a&gt;, but over the past fifty years, the United States has become considerably more inclusive and equality of access to opportunity has widened.  Take a look at &lt;a href=&quot;http://balrog.sdsu.edu/~putman/536/mixedschools.htm&quot;&gt;this article&lt;/a&gt; from the &lt;i&gt;Atlantic Monthly&lt;/i&gt; in 1956--1956!--if you don&apos;t believe me.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2004:site.36742</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2004 11:42:36 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>civilrights</category>
		<category>court</category>
		<category>discrimination</category>
		<category>equality</category>
		<category>history</category>
		<category>interracial</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>legislation</category>
		<category>loving</category>
		<category>marriage</category>
		<category>prejudice</category>
		<category>race</category>
		<category>racism</category>
		<category>rights</category>
		<category>scotus</category>
		<category>supremecourt</category>
		<category>virginia</category>
		<dc:creator>Sidhedevil</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


