Based on the incidents Kim experienced, her lawyer should examine her situation as it pertains to the employment protections and regulations within Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII prohibits public and private employers from discriminating against employees based on national origin, race, color, religion, and gender. These anti-discrimination guidelines apply in every step of the employment process, from the initial recruitment and interviewing to terminating employment. In Kim’s case, her lawyer should examine both Kim’s allegations of employment discrimination and sexual harassment pursuant to Title VII regulations.
Employment discrimination as it relates to Kim’s promotion Kim alleges that Nadal College (NC) discriminated against her by promoting her newer, less experienced colleague (Pete) to a position working with male athletes in a living-learning community instead of her. Title VII could potentially classify this as disparate treatment, meaning NC treated her differently than Pete because she is a woman. However, in this case, NC could easily claim being male was a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) because the job involved living and working with male students. In these cases, the law does not consider it discriminatory behavior to hire an employee of a specific sex because being male or female is essential to the job. With this exception in mind, Kim’s lawyer would likely not pursue the employment discrimination argument as it
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
On April 19, 1866, the US Congress passed the first ever Civil Rights Act. It gave black Americans the right to own their own property, to have legal protection in business, and to take people to court. The act was also the first time that black Americans were called citizens of the United States. This meant that black Americans would have the same rights and privileges as all other US citizens. Another Civil Rights Act was passed in 1875. This act made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race in public places, such as restaurants. In 1883, the Supreme Court ruled that the 1875 act was unconstitutional on the basis that businesses had the right to choose which customers they served and which they could ignore. This allowed businesses that provided public facilities to choose to exclude black people. On June 1, 1909, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was formed. It became the most important civil rights organization fighting for the rights of black people in the United States. It is still active today and has a membership of about half a million. On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court passed a judgment that changed the course of civil rights in the United States. In the case of Brown v. the Board of Education, the judges on the Supreme Court declared that racial segregation in education was unconstitutional and therefore against the law. This decision overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896. Shortly after noon on Monday May 17,
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 resulted from one of the most controversial House and Senate debates in history. It was also the biggest piece of civil rights legislation ever passed. The bill actually evolved from previous civil rights bills in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s. The bill passed through both houses finally on July 2, 1964 and was signed into law at 6:55 P.M. EST by President Lyndon Johnson. The act was originally drawn up in 1962 under President Kennedy before his assassination. The bill originated from two others, and one of which was the Equal Opportunity Act of 1962 that never went into law. This bill made up the core of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Bureau of National Affairs 18-20).
The Emancipation Proclamation freed all slaves in the U.S. After the Civil War, the withdrawal of the federal troops from the south, and the Fourteenth Amendment was what they emancipated. The reconstruction lasted 12 years from 1871 until 1883 when the Supreme Court ruled the Civil Rights Cases in which some Acts were invalid because they addressed social as opposed to civil rights. Although Congress responded with legislation that led to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, States kept on the books laws that continued the legacy of the black codes which were established by white Southerners, seeking to control the freedom of the 4 million black Southerners former slaves and, therefore, second-class citizenship were imposed for the newly freed slaves; being that they were landless and with little money to support themselves. Furthermore, the Court noted that the Fourteenth Amendment protected people against violations of their civil rights by states, not by the actions of individuals. It was aimed to provide the means for the Southern states to recognize that African American and Whites can live in harmony, together, without slavery. That was President Hayes, who in 1877 thought, that it was a new Era having new feelings for respecting each other, but the Southern states did not welcome this. In that same year, South Carolina’s Governor Hampton promoted the full equal protection right to blacks and whites. All good intention to change the
President Lyndon B. Johnson and President John F. Kennedy made many notable advances to outlaw discrimination in America. They fought against discrimination on race, color, religion, and national origin. Although the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments outlawed slavery, provided for equal protection under the law, guaranteed citizenship, and protected the right to vote, individual states continued to allow unfair treatment of minorities and passed Jim Crow laws allowing segregation of public facilities. America would not be the country it is today without their effort to make this country better and of course without the help of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The case, Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority, explores the issue of suspected racial discrimination associated with disparate treatment and disparate impact caused by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) against a qualified, experienced boilermaker and foreman that is African American. Questions for the court to evaluate regarding this case include: Is this a case of disparate treatment and/or impact and was the plaintiff, David Dunlap, subject to racial discrimination? Finally, did the TVA use personal hiring practices that allowed for racial bias in the interviewing process?
Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, segregation in the United States was commonly practiced in many of the Southern and Border States. This segregation while supposed to be separate but equal, was hardly that. Blacks in the South were discriminated against repeatedly while laws did nothing to protect their individual rights. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ridded the nation of this legal segregation and cleared a path towards equality and integration. The passage of this Act, while forever altering the relationship between blacks and whites, remains as one of history's greatest political battles.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was known as an end to racial segregation. It was brought about by a number of things including the effects of major events mostly involving riots. State and federal legislation needed it to be passed along with many social movements that influenced its decision. It is no question that it heavily changed America for the better by turning us into a melting pot and making us see that everyone should be treated as equals. It is important to remember that this act was not only beneficial to the time in which it was enacted, but it has affected our future by sustaining society. Today we continue to fight to outlaw discrimination within our nation, and thanks to the passing of this act we are able to be strong and help support the removal of unequal protection for all citizens. The general public has always deserved to be treated with the same rights that every White American is given. This act needed to be passed in order to see the harm we were causing by segregating people. America has grown so much since the act was established, and with it by our sides everyone can be able to have the rights they all truly deserve. Without this act in effect, the impacts on our country would be dire. We needed this act in order to flourish as one nation and continue to build movements against any discrimination.
In 1863, Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address defined the American government as an institution “of the people, by the people, [and] for the people”. Lincoln had an idealistic view of the government as an instrument for societal change. He, as well as the founding fathers, intended for the government to act in support of the people’s will or the majority rule. This democratic definition of the government has remained true throughout the course of American history. By placing all of its power on its citizens, the government itself did not decide the course of history but rather followed it. This follower mindset is seen through the government’s positive interactions with marginalized groups’ who in their attempts to overcome exclusion gained
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is considered by some to be one of the most important laws in American history. (The Most Important Cases, Speeches, Laws & Documents in American History) This Act was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 2, 1964 and it is a “comprehensive federal statute aimed at reducing discrimination in public accommodations and employment situations.” (Feuerbach Twomey, 2010) Specifically, it aimed at prohibiting “discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex (including pregnancy), and religion.” (Civil Rights Act of 1964, 2010) Additionally, it also
The Civil Rights Act of 1964, a turning point in the Civil Rights Movement, was passed in order to ban discrimination in public places as well as strengthen the role of the federal government to end segregation in public places. Also included in this act was the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which was established in order to ensure racial discrimination was not occurring within employment. The aspect of desegregation was not occurring rapidly in Southern states, such as Alabama. Not only was desegregation not occurring quickly under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but also the act did not address any issues with voting rights among the African-American community. The civil rights movement grew strong in southern regions especially racially tense areas such as Selma. In the city of Selma as well as a variety of other southern regions, African-Americans were harassed when attempting to practice their fundamental rights of voting through poll taxes and literacy tests. In 1965, only 1% of African-Americans were registered to vote in Selma but 50% of Selma’s population was African-American. In order to address the lack of voting rights, Martin Luther King and the SNCC worked vigorously on setting up marches to overcome the injustice that was occurring in Selma. Due to the overly aggressive authorities in the South, a majority of the marches ended violently thus increasing public support for new legislation to ensure the basic right of voting to the African-American
Necessary and Proper Clause: This is a clause within the United States Constitution specifically in Article I Section 8. It grants Congress the power to create laws or take certain actions that are not explicitly seen in the Constitution and allows flexibility within Congress. The Necessary and Proper clause allows Congress to use enumerated powers that are implied within the text of the Constitution.
The disparate treatment doctrine requires a plaintiff to demonstrate that an employer has treated some people less favorably than others because of their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Three provisions required to prove disparate treatment are (1) the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination; (2) the employer must articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions, and (3) the plaintiff must prove that the stated reason was in fact pretextual. Proof of discriminatory motive is critical and may be inferred from the mere fact of differences in treatment. Proof may also be inferred from the falsity of the employer’s explanation for the treatment, (Walsh, 2010).
The Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ) is contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under this title, employment in particular jobs may not be limited to individuals of a particular sex, religion, or national origin unless the employer can show that one of these factors is an actual and necessary qualification for performing the job. BFOQ is usually decided on a case-by-case basis. Race is never a BFOQ. When BFOQ is used as a defense, the employer admits sex discrimination but under the terms of the statute it is justified (Sovereign, p.91). The Supreme Court has determined that the BFOQ exception is intended as a narrow exception to the prohibition of sex-based discrimination (Hawke, p.58).