Search Results

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits voting practices and procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in language minority groups. In this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that two Arizona election provisions — one that prohibits third-party ballot collection and another that prohibits the counting of out-of-precinct votes — violated Section 2 because of their discriminatory impact on communities of color. The…

At issue in this case is the extent to which K-12 schools can regulate student speech that occurs off-campus. ADL joined a brief prepared by the National Women’s Law Center, Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, urging the Court to ensure that when it comes to off-campus speech, schools can regulate student bullying, harassment, or threats, but not speech that is merely perceived to substantially disrupt school activities. The…

At issue in this case is a religiously affiliated, taxpayer-funded foster care agency seeking to discriminate against same-sex couples applying to be foster parents. Invoking the Free Exercise Clause, the agency claims that its religious beliefs about same-sex marriage supplant a local anti-discrimination law’s prohibition on sexual orientation discrimination. In rejecting this claim, ADL’s amicus brief asserts that the sought exemption is not permitted by the Free Exercise Clause…

At issue in this case is a business that seeks a religious exemption from a state anti-discrimination law for the purpose of denying wedding-related services to LGBTQ couples. It, however, does not currently sell such services and there is no allegation that the business violated the law. ADL joined a legal brief filed by religious and civil rights organizations asserting that the business’ lawsuit is premature. Even if it was not, the requested exemption is not required by the Free…

This case involves a transgender criminal defendant who made a written request that the Fifth Circuit refer to her by her preferred name (Katherine Nicole Jett) and pronouns while her appeal is pending. The Fifth Circuit issued a ruling denying Ms. Jett’s request and insisting that the court will continue to refer to her by her given name and by using male pronouns. ADL joined a coalition amicus brief that takes no position on the merits of the underlying criminal case, but urges the…

This case involves a challenge to the Orange County, Florida anti-discrimination ordinance that prohibits employment, housing and public accommodation discrimination. Unlike the State’s anti-discrimination law, it covers the categories of sexual orientation and gender identity. A trial court struck down the ordinance on the grounds that the State law is the only legal remedy for discrimination in Florida. ADL joined a brief filed on behalf of a diverse group of civil rights organizations…

This case challenges a law Louisiana passed in 2014 that imposed new requirements on abortion providers, including mandating that they have active admitting privileges at a local hospital. The impact of this law would be that only one abortion clinic would remain open in Louisiana, and there would not be any physician in the state providing abortions after 17 weeks. ADL joined with the National Women’s Law Center and 71 other organizations on an amicus brief urging that the law —…

New York State bars all state licensed adoption agencies from discriminating against prospective adoptive parents because of sexual orientation and gender identity, among other characteristics. At issue in this case is a free exercise challenge by a religious child placement agency that did not want to place children with same-sex couples. ADL joined an amicus brief in support of New York State filed by a diverse group of civil rights organizations. It asserts that as matter of law the Free…

At issue in this case is whether under one of the oldest federal civil rights statutes — Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 — race discrimination victims must meet the burdensome “but-for” causation standard at the pleading stage instead of a more lenient “mixed motive” standard. ADL joined a coalition of civil rights organizations on an amicus brief arguing that the application of a “but-for” evidentiary standard would be inconsistent…

At issue in these cases is whether someone can legally be fired just because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination “because of…sex” and federal and appellate courts have held that this prohibition extends to sexual orientation and gender identity. ADL joined a coalition of 59 civil rights organizations on an amicus brief arguing that it is important that the Court recognize that Title VII protects…

In North Carolina, the state appellate courts have never, in the thirty years since Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (the seminal U.S. Supreme Court decision establishing the legal framework for claims of race discrimination in the exercise of peremptory strikes), found a single instance of discrimination against a juror of color, including in the two cases on appeal in this matter. ADL accordingly joined an amicus brief alongside a coalition of state and national criminal justice and…

This case involves an appeal for a new trial for Petitioner Randy Halprin, one of six individuals convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death for the murder of Irving, Texas police officer Aubrey Hawkins. The appeal notes that former state District Judge Vickers Cunningham was deeply prejudiced against Mr. Haplrin because he is Jewish. ADL filed an amicus brief in support of Mr. Halprin’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the United States District Court Northern District of…

At stake in this case are the administration’s final rules on religious and moral objections to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) contraceptive mandate. The federal court issued a nationwide injunction blocking the new rules, which would effectively repeal the contraceptive mandate and broadly allow employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their employees’ and students’ contraceptive coverage that is otherwise guaranteed by the ACA. On…

This case involves Equal Protection Clause and Title IX challenges to a county school board policy that prohibits transgender students from using the restroom which conform to their gender identity. ADL joined a brief filed by the National Women’s Law Center opposing this policy. The brief focuses on the claim under Title IX, a federal law which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex at publicly funded educational institutions. The brief asserts that the law’s protections…

At stake in this case are the administration’s final rules on religious and moral objections to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) contraceptive mandate. The federal court issued a nationwide injunction blocking the new rules, which would effectively repeal the contraceptive mandate and broadly allow employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their employees’ and students’ contraceptive coverage that is otherwise guaranteed by the ACA. On…