Title Vii Of The 1964 Civil Rights Act Forbids Intentional Discrimination

These ensure that each sex of person receives equal opportunity to participate in federally funded programs. If the federal government funds the program, the program must follow Title IX and Section 1983 legislation. Each of these statues removes the bias of gender, age, race, color, etc. and allow for equal opportunities to participate in federally funded programs. The equal protection issue resurfaces in instances where federal funding is not in place. Grove City College and 4 students attempted to manipulate the rules to avoid a Title IX lawsuit by removing federal funding altogether (Grove City College v. Bell, 1984). The college pleaded to the Supreme Court to remove federal funding to avoid noncompliance, as they are a private, liberal arts college that does not accept federal assistance or Regular Disbursement Systems from the Department of Education. However, the students involved received federal Basic Educational Opportunity Grants, which qualifies them and thus the school as being federally funded. Based on this information, the school was not following the laws set in place regarding federal funding and was unable to execute the Assurance of Compliance. In regarding equal protection, the Assurance of Compliance ensures that programs receiving federal assistance are aware of their agreement with the law and of all obligations regarding

The last decade has produced an explosion of racial employment discrimination lawsuits. These lawsuits have resulted in record-breaking settlements. By federally mandating every business to review the history, impact and proposed policy of Article VII these lawsuits may subside. Reviewing Title VII is a step corporate America must soon make or continue to loose much needed revenue. Our team will discuss the history of Title VII, the impact of Title VII in the workplace, who is and who is not covered under Title VII as well as propose policies that companies should have in place to avoid Title VII violations.

On July 9, 1868 the 14th amendment to the constitution was ratified. This amendment granted citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States," which included former slaves recently freed. Although the slaves were freed, there was still discrimination all around them. Discrimination is defined as "differences between things or treating someone as inferior based on their race". In 1800’s through 1900 there was a huge amount of cases that occurred due to violations of the 14th Amendment. Two well known landmark Supreme Court cases involving the 14th Amendment are Plessy vs. Ferguson and Brown vs. Board of Education.

Facts: This is a Title VII action alleging harassment based on national origin and religion. The facts are set forth in the light most favorable to Rafiq. On May 11, 2001, Mohommed Rafiq was hired as a car salesman. Rafiq was born in India and is a practicing Muslim. The alleged harassment began on September 11, 2001. When he arrived for work that afternoon, his co-workers were watching news coverage of the terrorist attacks and one of them asked him in a mocking way, "Where have you been?", as if to infer that he had participated in the attacks.

Then, in a 1984 decision, Grove City v. Bell, the U.S. Supreme Court gutted Title IX. In that ruling, the court said Title IX did not cover entire educational institutions - only those programs directly receiving federal funds. Other programs, such as athletics, that did not receive federal funds, were free to discriminate on the basis of gender.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that protects individuals from discrimination based on religion. Religious discrimination is treating a person differently because of their religious

The United States national government enacted Title IX in response to incidents and concerns at different Universities nationally. Title IX is a federal civil rights law that states “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance”.Although Title IX is well known for its impact on intercollegiate atherley ctcs, it is not just limited to exclusion from sports or workplace programs, but from also discrimination on the basis of sex can include, but is not limited to, rape,

In Ricci v. DeStefano there were a group of firefighters who took a written exam for promotion in the New Haven, CT fire department. When the results were tallied, more white firefighters passed or did better on the exam than black firefighters, which would have led to a disproportionate number of white candidates getting promoted. As a result of this, the City of New Haven, CT Fire Department, threw the exam out and no one was promoted. This went to the Supreme Court and they found that by discarding the exams, the City of New Haven violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (website).

In today’s world, the American still has barriers to overcome in the matter of racial equality. Whether it is being passed over for a promotion at the job or being underpaid, some people have to deal with unfair practice that would prevent someone of color or the opposite sex from having equal opportunity at the job. In 2004, Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores Incorporation was a civil rights class-action suite that ruled in favor of the women who worked and did not received promotions, pay and certain job assignments. This proves that some corporations ignore the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which protects workers from discrimination based on sex, race, religion or national origin.

The case study in question relates to a proposed dress code for the players in the National Basketball League (NBL). Dress code requirements must not discriminate against members of protected groups as outlined in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In order to adequately analyze this issue, we must look at possible areas of discrimination including religious, racial, gender and disability discrimination. In this particular case the players are claiming racial discrimination against the NBL and its commissioner.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 “outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin when hiring, promoting, or firing employees; in public accommodations and in all programs receiving federal funding”(Barnes & Bowles, 2015). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 created equal opportunities for everyone including women by making it illegal to discriminate. Because of this Act businesses can no longer refuse to employee an individual just because they are “black” or a “women.”

According to the Legal Dictionary (2014), “The Wards Cove decision was severely criticized by Civil Rights leaders, who believed the Supreme Court had made disparate impact cases almost impossible to win” (p.1). The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was in effect. This act proposed that employees must have proof in showing that the employer committed a disparate impact crime. No longer would it allow the victims to argue against the company based on their own views. At the same time the owner must show evidence that there is a crime committed based on these findings. Title VII along with the Civil Rights Act would dismiss any further rulings on this matter. The Supreme Court has adjusted some of the compensation methods for the disparate impact theory. It is against the law for an employer to allow different standards, conditions, or terms of the job to their workers. This

When addressing legal issues of diversity in the modern day era, one main topic is brought to discussion, affirmative action. It was put into place by the federal government in the 1960’s and was initially developed to close the gap in relation to the privileged majority and the unprivileged minority in America (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). While it has been controversial since its origin, it remains controversial as critics argue it tries to equalize the impact of so many

These black individuals would not be able to pass an intelligence test at the rate of an average high school graduate or provide a high school diploma and therefore would not be able to attend certain colleges, be able to vote, or work in certain positions. The judges understood what the previous court cases found and realized that the Title VII Civil Rights Act prohibited employers from discriminating against black

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that it is unlawful for an employer to refuse to hire, discharge or discriminate against an individual because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Under Title VII sex discrimination is not unlawful if BFOQ can be proven as necessary for that position.