DOJ ALLEGES SOUTHEASTERN OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST TRANSGENDER EMPLOYEE

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, March 30, 2015
Justice Department Files Lawsuit Alleging that Southeastern Oklahoma State University Discriminated Against Transgender Woman

The Justice Department announced today the filing of a lawsuit against Southeastern Oklahoma State University (Southeastern) and the Regional University System of Oklahoma (RUSO) for violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating against a transgender employee on the basis of her sex and retaliating against her when she complained about the discrimination.  Attorney General Eric Holder announced in December 2014 that the Department of Justice takes the position that Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination is best read to extend the statute’s protection to claims based on an individual’s gender identity, including transgender status.

According to the United States’ complaint, filed in federal district court in Oklahoma City today, Rachel Tudor began working for Southeastern as an Assistant Professor in 2004.  At the time of her hire, Tudor presented as a man.  In 2007, Tudor, consistent with her gender identity, began to present as a woman at work.  Throughout her employment, Tudor performed her job well, and in 2009, she applied for a promotion to the tenured position of Associate Professor.  Southeastern’s administration denied her application, overruling the recommendations of her department chair and other tenured faculty from her department.  The United States’ complaint alleges that Southeastern discriminated against Tudor when it denied her application because of her gender identity, gender transition and non-conformance with gender stereotypes.

“By standing beside Dr. Tudor, the Department of Justice sends a clear message that we are committed to eliminating discrimination on the basis of sex and gender identity,” said Attorney General Eric Holder.  “We will not allow unfair biases and unjust prejudices to prevent transgender Americans from reaching their full potential as workers and as citizens.  And we will continue to work tirelessly, using every legal tool available, to ensure that transgender individuals are guaranteed the rights and protections that all Americans deserve.”

In 2010, Tudor filed complaints regarding the denial of her application for promotion and tenure.  Shortly after it learned of her complaints, Southeastern refused to let Tudor re-apply for promotion and tenure despite Southeastern’s own policies permitting re-application.  At the end of the 2010-11 academic year, Southeastern and RUSO terminated Tudor’s employment because she had not obtained tenure.

Tudor filed a charge of discrimination with the Oklahoma City Area Office of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging that Southeastern’s decisions were unlawful.  The EEOC investigated the charge and determined that there was reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred.  The EEOC’s attempts at conciliation were unsuccessful, and it referred the matter to the Department of Justice.

This lawsuit was brought by the Department of Justice as a result of a joint effort to enhance collaboration between the EEOC and the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division for vigorous enforcement of Title VII.

“The Department of Justice is committed to protecting the civil rights of all Americans, including transgender Americans,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division.  “Discrimination against employees because of their gender identity, gender transition, or because they do not conform to stereotypical notions about how men and women should act or appear violates Title VII.  Retaliating against an employee for complaining about unlawful discrimination, as happened in this case, is also unacceptable under Title VII.”

“This is a tremendous example of how collaboration between EEOC and the Department of Justice leads to strong and coordinated enforcement of Title VII,” said EEOC Chair Jenny R. Yang.  “This case furthers the EEOC’s Strategic Enforcement Plan, which includes coverage of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals under Title VII's sex discrimination provisions as a national enforcement priority.”

“The American workplace must be a level playing field free from discrimination – a place where employees compete based on their merit,” said Director Holly Waldron Cole of the EEOC’s Oklahoma City Area Office.  “Here, the decisions about Dr. Tudor’s employment should have been based on her qualifications, not on impermissible bias and stereotype.”

As alleged in the complaint, Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination includes discrimination because of gender identity or because an employee has completed a gender transition or is undertaking a gender transition.  Title VII also prohibits an employer from discriminating against an employee because her behavior or appearance does not conform to traditional gender stereotypes.  In addition, Title VII prohibits employers from retaliating against employees, like Tudor, who lodge complaints about discriminatory treatment.  Through its lawsuit, the United States seeks both monetary and injunctive relief.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced in December 2014 that the Department of Justice takes the position that Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination is best read to extend the statute’s protection to claims based on an individual’s gender identity, including transgender status.

DOJ SUES MOBILE HOME PARK FOR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Friday, October 17, 2014

Justice Department Sues Wisconsin Mobile Home Park for Discriminating Against Families with Children

The Justice Department announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against the owners and operators of the Twin Oaks Mobile Home Park, a 230-lot mobile home park, in Whitewater, Wisconsin, for refusing to allow families with children to live in certain areas of the park, in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Madison, Wisconsin, alleges that the owner of Twin Oaks, Twin Oaks Mobile Home Park, Inc. and its managers—Merrill Eugene Gutzmer and Dennis Hansen—violated the Fair Housing Act by maintaining and enforcing a policy of not allowing families with children to reside in an area that includes approximately 60 of the 230 lots within the park.  The park does not limit residency to older persons.  The complaint further alleges that, under the policy described above, the defendants refused to approve the application for residency of a single woman who planned to purchase the home of a former resident and live there with her then two-year-old child.  The single woman and the mobile home owner who was trying to sell her mobile home subsequently filed a complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”).  After conducting an investigation, HUD found that the defendants had violated the Fair Housing Act, and referred the matter to the Department of Justice.

“For over twenty-five years, the Fair Housing Act has prohibited housing providers from refusing to rent or sell housing to families with children,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Molly Moran for the Civil Rights Division.  “Many parents are already struggling to find affordable housing for their families, and they should not also have to face discrimination because they have children.”

“This office is committed to ensuring that all residents in this district, including families with children, are afforded equal opportunity to rent and live where they choose under the Fair Housing Act,” said U.S. Attorney John W. Vaudreuil for the Western District of Wisconsin.  “Discrimination based on familial status will not be tolerated in this district.”          

“HUD and the Department of Justice will continue to enforce the Fair Housing Act to ensure that the housing options of families are not illegally limited because they have children,” said HUD Assistant Secretary Gustavo Velasquez for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity.

The suit seeks a court order requiring the defendants to bring their policies and practices into compliance with the Fair Housing Act, as well as monetary damages for persons harmed and civil penalties to the United States.

The federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, and disability.  Among other things, the Fair Housing Act makes it illegal to refuse to rent housing and to discriminate in the terms or conditions of housing rentals because of familial status, except in specified categories of housing that are reserved for older persons.

DOJ SETTLES WITH COLORADO SCHOOL DISCTICT REGARDING RACIAL HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT  

Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Department of Justice Reaches Settlement Agreement with Colorado School District to Address Racial Harassment and Discrimination

The Justice Department announced that it has entered into a comprehensive settlement agreement with the Falcon School District 49 in Colorado Springs, Colorado, to resolve complaints about the district’s response to racial harassment and discrimination in its schools.  

The agreement will continue for at least three years and replaces a settlement agreement reached by the parties in 2010 which addressed similar issues. The agreement requires the district to take affirmative steps to eliminate and prevent racial harassment and discrimination in schools.  Specifically, the district agrees to:

revise its policies and procedures on harassment and discrimination;
maintain adequate records of all incidents of racial harassment and discrimination;
analyze incidents of racial harassment and discrimination to ensure that all incidents are properly identified, investigated, and resolved;
train staff in preventing and responding to harassment and discrimination;
provide training to students to prevent and address harassment and discrimination;
include restorative justice techniques and positive behavior interventions and supports in the district’s disciplinary responses to incidents of harassment and discrimination; and
hire a consultant to identify any additional measures the district should take to effectively address, prevent, and respond to harassment and discrimination.
“We applaud the Falcon School District 49 for working cooperatively with the Department of Justice to resolve this matter and ensure that all students can attend school without fear of harassment or discrimination from their peers,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Molly Moran for the Civil Rights Division.

AG HOLDER CRITICIZES WISCONSIN VOTER ID STATUTE

A.G. HOLDER U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT PHOTO

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Criticizing Wisconsin’s Voter Id Statute, Attorney General Holder Pledges Aggressive Enforcement of Remaining Parts of Voting Rights Act
WASHINGTON—On the one-year anniversary of the Supreme Court decision that struck down a key part of the Voting Rights Act, Attorney General Eric Holder pledged Wednesday that the Justice Department would remain aggressive in using Section 2 of the law—which was left intact by the Court’s decision—to guard against unjust voting restrictions.

Section 2, which prohibits barriers to voting that disadvantage minority groups, provided the basis for the department’s lawsuits last year against voting laws in North Carolina and Texas. It also formed the basis for a recent challenge to a voter ID statue in Wisconsin. In April, a federal district court sided with the plaintiffs in that case, declaring that the Wisconsin law violated both the equal protection clause of the Constitution and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Holder joined in criticizing the Wisconsin law in his message Wednesday.

“The Wisconsin law erected significant barriers to equal access without serving any legitimate government interest,” Holder said.

“It’s clear that discriminatory voting laws, rules, and regulations are not confined to any particular region. And thanks to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, neither are our enforcement efforts,” he added.

A full copy of the Attorney General’s video message appears below.

“One year ago today, in the case of Shelby County, a narrowly split but deeply divided U.S. Supreme Court struck down a key part of the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965.

“This was a deeply flawed decision – and it effectively invalidated a cornerstone of American civil rights law.

“In the nearly five decades leading up to that ruling, a critical provision of the Voting Rights Act known as Section 5 – which enjoyed consistent support from Members of Congress and presidents of both parties – provided the Justice Department with a rigorous tool to fight unjust attempts to abridge voting rights.

“It required certain jurisdictions with histories of discrimination to seek “preclearance,” from the Department or a federal court, before new voting changes could take effect – so these proposals could be subjected to fair and thorough review.

“This empowered the Justice Department to protect the right of every American to cast a ballot – unencumbered by discriminatory rules, regulations, and procedures that, intentionally or not, discourage and disenfranchise.

“Indeed, not long before the Shelby County decision, a federal judge considering the Department’s objection to South Carolina’s voter ID law noted the ‘continuing utility’ of preclearance ‘in deterring problematic, and hence encouraging non-discriminatory, changes in state and local voting laws.’

“When the Shelby decision effectively denied us this tool, the Department’s Civil Rights Division shifted resources to the enforcement of other protections that remain on the books – including Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits barriers to voting that disadvantage minority groups.

“During the past year, we filed Section 2 challenges to specific laws in North Carolina and Texas that could disproportionately restrict access to the ballot box for minority citizens.
“Section 2 also provides a valuable tool to individual voters who seek to protect their voting rights.

“In April, a federal district court in Wisconsin ruled that Wisconsin’s unnecessarily restrictive voter-ID law, which disproportionately impacted the state’s African-American and Latino voters, violated both the equal protection clause of the Constitution and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

“The Wisconsin law erected significant barriers to equal access without serving any legitimate government interest – because, as the judge found, and I quote, “The defendants could not point to a single instance of known voter impersonation occurring in Wisconsin at any time in the recent past.”

“By restricting access and decreasing voter participation, laws such as those in Wisconsin would shrink – rather than expand – access to the franchise.

“This is inconsistent not only with our history, but with our ideals as a nation – a nation founded on the principle that all citizens are entitled to equal opportunity, equal representation, and equal rights.

“And that’s why, across this country, the Department of Justice will continue to take aggressive steps to stand against disenfranchisement wherever it exists – and in whatever form.

“It’s clear that discriminatory voting laws, rules, and regulations are not confined to any particular region. And thanks to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, neither are our enforcement efforts.

“We will not simply stand by as the voices of many citizens are shut out of the process of self-governance.

“And in the days ahead, we will continue to work with Congressional leaders to fill the void left by the Supreme Court’s ruling – and use every available tool to safeguard the most basic right of American citizenship.”

AG HOLDER'S REMARKS AT LAMDA LEGAL RECEPTION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

Attorney General Eric Holder Delivers Remarks at the 14th Annual Lambda Legal Reception

~ Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Thank you, Patrick [Menasco] and Sandy [Chamblee], for those kind words; for your friendship over the years; and for your tireless work in leading the legal profession towards greater diversity and inclusion.  It’s a pleasure to share the stage with you this evening. And it’s a great privilege to join dedicated leaders like Executive Director Kevin Cathcart – and trailblazers like my friend Paul Smith – in celebrating Lambda Legal’s remarkable record of achievement; in reflecting on the work that remains before us; and in reaffirming our commitment to build the more just and more equal society that everyone in this country deserves.

I’d like to thank the co-chairs of this event, Karen Dixon and Patrick Menasco, for making this celebration possible – and for the profound and historic role that you, your colleagues, and so many other advocates and citizens have played in advancing the fight for civil rights and LGBT equality.

Since this organization’s inception, more than 40 years ago – during a period of unrelenting discrimination, harassment, and prejudice; in an era marked by hostility, fear, and isolation; and in the wake of Stonewall – leading members of our nation’s legal community have had the courage to resist oppression, to stand up against injustice, and to come out for the rights that belong to all Americans.  For decades, their courage has helped to empower brave men and women from all backgrounds and walks of life – including current members of Lambda Legal – to turn a nascent, tumultuous awakening among the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community into a unified movement for dignity, for freedom, and for equality.

Today – alongside millions of pioneers, partners, and allies – you’re continuing to fight for the core ideals that have defined this nation since its earliest days.  And you’re helping this country to realize the promises first codified in our founding documents: the notion that all are created equal; the principle that all are entitled to the same protections;  and the fundamental truth that everyone among us possesses the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – no matter who they are or who they love.

Over the years – from our courthouses to our schools; from our health care centers to our homes; from our workplaces to our criminal justice system – thanks to Lambda Legal and many other groups, there’s no question that we’ve seen transformational, groundbreaking progress.  Today, this progress is woven into the lives of countless Americans – in critical actions taken to support LGBT individuals and assist people with HIV; in landmark Supreme Court decisions and vital changes to federal and state law; and in the legacy of once-unimaginable change that now stands as a testament to the power of collective action – and a challenge to successive generations.

This ongoing work belongs to the proudest traditions of leadership and advocacy that this country has ever known – from abolitionists and suffragettes, to freedom riders, civil rights attorneys, and activists who, throughout history, have refused to accept an unjust status quo.  Through the actions of all who have devoted – and in too many cases given – their lives for the dignity and equality of every person.  We have extended the American Dream to include women, people of color, young people, Americans with disabilities, and so many others. Today – 45 long years after Stonewall – we can finally envision a day when the sun will rise on an America that sees LGBT individuals as full and equal citizens.

But that day has not yet arrived.  I firmly believe that the struggle to make it a reality constitutes a defining civil rights challenge of our time.  And that’s why President Obama and I are committed to standing shoulder-to-shoulder with everyone who has the courage to reach for the values of equality and opportunity.

We come together tonight at an important juncture – in a moment defined by challenge, consequence, and great opportunity.  Remarkable achievements stretch behind us.  Important, life-changing work lies ahead.  And I want the American people to know that this Administration – and this Department of Justice and this Attorney General – will never be content to be bystanders to the march of history.  We will march, we will fight, and we will work alongside you to help shape it.

In just the last five years, we’ve seen significant progress.  With the adoption of the landmark Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which President Obama signed into law in 2009, we strengthened our ability to achieve justice on behalf of those who are victimized simply because of their race, religion, color, or national origin – and, for the first time ever, their disability, gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation.  With new transgender cultural competency training for law enforcement officers, we’re helping local authorities improve their interactions with transgender people.  With the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 2010 – an achievement that Lambda Legal helped make possible – we reaffirmed that love of country, not love of another, determines one’s fitness to serve.  And we ensured that, here at home and around the world, brave lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans can serve proudly, honestly, and openly – without fear of being discharged for who they are.

More recently, with the signing of the newly-reauthorized Violence Against Women Act, we codified into law robust new provisions to ensure that LGBT survivors of domestic abuse can access the same services as other survivors of partner violence.  And with last year’s historic Supreme Court decision in the case of United States v. Windsor – a watershed moment for all who believe in equal protection under law – we helped bring about a major advancement in the cause of justice and a resounding victory for committed and loving couples from coast to coast.

The Windsor decision marked the culmination of a lengthy court battle, supported by your litigation efforts and your work to educate society about LGBT individuals and families.  The impact of this singular ruling already has been, and will continue to be, both dramatic and far-reaching.  But it does not signify the end of our legal fight – a fight that began long before the President and I decided, in early 2011, that Justice Department lawyers would no longer defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act.  Rather, Windsor marked the beginning of a new chapter.

After all, as we speak – fully 60 years after the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education – the LGBT community is still waiting for its own unequivocal declaration that separate is inherently unequal.

I was just three years old in 1954, when Brown was decided.  Mine was the first generation to grow up in a world in which “separate but equal” was no longer the law of the land.  But, as anyone old enough to remember those tumultuous days can tell you, the words of Brown were not automatically translated into substantive change.  Discrimination and prejudice persisted then, and persist even today – imperiling progress, opportunity, and access for far too many Americans.

Today, we wage a different struggle to combat different forms of discrimination.  But combating the denial of dignity – and the inability of many to avail themselves of basic rights – remains our common cause. When I was a child during the Civil Rights Era – thanks to my parents’ protection, love, and devotion, and despite the turmoil that raged across the nation – I knew that my home would always provide a refuge of inviolable safety, solace, and support.  Tragically, as some in this room know – and have even experienced firsthand – far too many LGBT youth and adults don’t have access to the same kind of refuge.  Far too many don’t have the benefit of the support of their families and the safe haven that home can provide.  And although millions of Americans have stood together to remind these young men and women that “it gets better,” too many others continue to hold beliefs and perpetuate stereotypes that LGBT citizens are somehow inferior.  That their love is somehow less worthy.  And that who they are – at their very core – is somehow less legitimate than their peers.

These pernicious ideas and poisonous notions can rend families apart, dividing parents from children and siblings from one another.  And the consequences for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth can be devastating – and, all too often, deadly – with suicide rates among lesbian, gay, and bisexual young people four times higher than their heterosexual peers, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

As a nation, we cannot abide such an unjust status quo.  As a people, we must demand far better.  And as a legal community, we must continue to call out – and actively challenge – animus-driven and discriminatory rules and policies wherever they are found.

In the wake of the Windsor decision, my Justice Department colleagues and I, in partnership with other agencies across the government, have moved rapidly to fulfill this charge by ensuring the swift implementation of this important ruling – in both letter and spirit. We’ve already extended significant benefits and protections to Americans in same-sex marriages – including health insurance and other key benefits for federal employees and their families; a uniform policy ensuring that all same-sex married couples are recognized for federal tax purposes; and a policy dictating that – for purposes of immigration law – same-sex and opposite-sex marriages will be treated exactly the same.  We’ve worked with the Defense Department to determine that members of the military who are in same-sex marriages will receive the same benefits available to opposite sex couples.  And, as a variety of marriage cases and appeals have proceeded across the nation, we’ve seen a string of court decisions striking down state laws precluding same-sex marriages – including as recently as this past Friday, in Wisconsin.  In response, we have taken appropriate action to ensure that the federal government will recognize all same-sex marriages that are lawful and valid under state law.

Beyond these efforts, in February, I announced a new policy memorandum that – for the first time in history – directs all Justice Department employees to give lawful same-sex marriages full and equal recognition, to the greatest extent possible under the law.  This means that, in every courthouse, in every proceeding, and in every place where a member of the Department of Justice stands on behalf of the United States – we will strive to ensure that same-sex marriages receive the same privileges, protections, and rights as opposite-sex marriages under federal law.

All of these changes will have profoundly positive, real-world implications for many throughout the nation.  Every step forward is laudatory, and every marker of progress worth celebrating.  But, as you know as well as anyone, this is no time to be complacent.  Our pursuit of a more perfect Union must go on.  The work of extending opportunity and preserving liberty is both vast and unending.  And there remains a great deal to be done.

Even as we speak, LGBT workers in too many states can be fired just because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.  As the President said in his Pride Month Proclamation, it’s past time for Congress to correct this injustice by passing an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

In America’s health care system, far too many LGBT individuals continue to face unjust and unwarranted health disparities.  The Obama Administration will keep working to address these disparities through implementation of the Affordable Care Act.  And we’ll keep moving forward with our cutting-edge National HIV/AIDS Strategy, which is focused on improving care while decreasing HIV transmission rates among communities most at risk.

And in far too many organizations, policies and practices that discriminate against LGBT individuals remain persistent concerns. Lambda Legal is among the groups that have led efforts to address these conditions – for instance, through your work in 1992, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, to challenge the termination of an Assistant Scoutmaster when the organization found out he was gay.  Unfortunately, the continuation of a policy that discriminates against gay adult leaders – by an iconic American institution – only preserves and perpetuates the worst kind of stereotypes.  Like “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” it’s a relic of an age of prejudice and insufficient understanding.  Today, courageous lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals routinely put their lives on the line as members of America’s armed services.  They inspire us, they protect us, and they defend us.  And if these men and women are fit for military service, then surely they are fit to mentor, to teach, and to serve as role models for the leaders of future generations.

Throughout history, America’s highest ideals – realized in the expanding inclusiveness of our laws and a succession of historic Supreme Court rulings, from Brown to Zablocki, from Romer to Lawrence, from Loving to Windsor – have lit a clear path forward.  A path to equality and fullness of life for every man and every woman.  A path to healing for tired minds and overburdened spirits.  And a path along which we have made tremendous strides, thanks to leaders and advocates in and far beyond this room.

Yet our journey still stretches beyond the horizon. And that’s why, until we reach our destination, this Department of Justice will never back down.  We will never give up.  And we will never stop working to provide LGBT individuals – and all Americans – with the security and the essential protections to which they are entitled.

The progress we’ve achieved is truly worth celebrating.  But, on its own, it’s not enough – not until every individual, every family, and every worker is treated with the dignity and respect they deserve.

It’s not enough until every parent can fully support, and recognize the worth, of their lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender child.

It’s not enough until every student feels safe from harassment in the classroom and on the playground.

And it’s not enough until the circle of opportunity and equality is so wide – and so accessible – that the American Dream is available to everyone with the heart to dream it.

 This evening, as we renew our commitment to move forward together – with confidence in the efforts of our allies, and with deep and abiding faith in the American people – I cannot help but feel optimistic that we can, and will, seize the opportunities now before us.  But never forget that positive change is not inevitable. We must stand together, and work together, and sacrifice together, to see that justice is done.  We must strengthen and extend our nation’s long tradition of increasing inclusion.  And thanks to the leadership, the determination, and the persistence of legal advocates and courageous citizens alike, I am confident that we will ultimately be successful in our enduring pursuit of a more equal, more just, and more perfect Union.

  Thank you.

CITY OF AUSTIN SETTLES EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION ALLEGATIONS WITH DOJ

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Monday, June 9, 2014

Justice Department Settles Employment Discrimination Allegations Against City of Austin

The Department of Justice announced today that it has entered into and filed a consent decree that, if approved by the court, will resolve the department’s allegations that the city of Austin violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating against African-American and Hispanic applicants for entry-level firefighter positions at the Austin Fire Department (AFD).

Title VII’s prohibitions of discrimination in employment forbid not only intentional discrimination, but also the use of employment practices, such as written tests, that result in disparate impact against any group based on the race, color, sex, national origin or religion of that group’s members, unless an employer can prove that such practices are job related and consistent with business necessity.  Absent such proof, those practices do not identify the best qualified candidates and violate the law.  The complaint, filed along with the consent decree in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas in Austin, alleges that in 2012, the city used a written test that disproportionately eliminated African-Americans and Hispanics from the hiring process, and that Austin cannot demonstrate that its use of the test was job related and consistent with business necessity.  Similarly, the complaint alleges that Austin’s method of weighting the 2012 assessments and processing candidates in descending rank order by composite score had an adverse impact on individuals in these protected groups who passed the written test, and that this practice was also not job related or consistent with business necessity.  The United States has challenged the hiring process Austin planned to use for these positions in 2013 as well.

The Justice Department, along with the city of Austin, filed a joint motion today requesting that the court provisionally approve the consent decree executed by the parties and schedule an initial fairness hearing regarding the terms of the consent decree.

The consent decree requires that Austin no longer use the selection practices challenged by the United States in screening and selecting candidates for the AFD’s entry-level firefighter positions.  The decree requires that Austin develop a new, lawful selection procedure that complies with Title VII, and also requires that the city pay $780,000 in back pay to entry-level firefighter applicants who were harmed by the 2012 hiring practice challenged by the United States and who are determined to be eligible for relief.  Additionally, African-American and Hispanic applicants determined to be eligible for relief under the decree will be eligible for one of 30 priority appointments to an entry-level firefighter position with the AFD.  All applicants must pass the new, lawful selection procedure and other lawful selection procedures in order to be considered for priority hire relief.  African-American and Hispanic applicants who are offered priority hire relief are also eligible for retroactive seniority.

“The Department of Justice will not permit employers to use screening and selection devices that adversely affect any protected group unless those devices are shown to properly distinguish between qualified and unqualified applicants,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels for the Civil Rights Division.  “The department commends Austin for its efforts to address these issues and to ensure that effective, Title VII-compliant selection practices are put into place.”

The department and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) each investigated the AFD’s hiring practices.  Today’s proposed resolution was made possible in part through collaboration between the department and the San Antonio Field Office of the EEOC.

More information about Title VII and other federal employment laws is available on the Department of Justice website.

JUSTICE SETTLES DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT WITH FDNY FOR $98 MILLION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Justice Department Reaches Agreement in Principle with the New York City Fire Department Over Discriminatory Hiring Practices Resulting in $98 Million in Relief

The Justice Department announced today that it has reached an agreement in principle with the city of New York and intervening plaintiffs to settle an employment discrimination lawsuit involving the New York City Fire Department (FDNY).  Under the agreement in principle, the city of New York will pay a total of approximately $98 million to resolve allegations that the FDNY engaged in a pattern or practice of employment discrimination against African-American and Hispanic applicants for the entry-level firefighter position by using two discriminatory written tests in 1999 and 2002.  The parties’ agreement in principle will be incorporated into a consent decree that is subject to a fairness hearing and must be approved by the district court.

“This resolution will help ensure that those who seek to serve as firefighters in New York City have an equal opportunity to do so, regardless of their race,” said Associate Attorney General Tony West.  “The agreement we are announcing today – which is the result of the collective efforts of the Justice Department, the private plaintiffs, and the city of New York – not only will compensate victims of discriminatory hiring practices, it will also put in place an entry-level hiring process that should more accurately identify firefighter candidates who are best qualified to do the job.”

“This agreement in principle to settle will provide significant and long-awaited relief to African-American and Hispanic applicants for employment with the FDNY who were harmed by the FDNY’s discriminatory hiring practices,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels for the Civil Rights Division.  “We applaud the city of New York and Mayor de Blasio for their efforts to bring this important matter to a resolution.  The Department of Justice stands committed to ensuring justice and compensation to those who are victims of unfair employment practices.”

The lawsuit originated in 2007 when the department filed its complaint alleging that the FDNY’s use of two written tests violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by disproportionately screening out African-American and Hispanic applicants for the entry-level firefighter position.  The FDNY was unable to show that these screening devices identified the candidates who were best qualified to perform the job of firefighter, as required in order to keep the tests in place.

“We commend the city for its commitment to rectifying past discrimination against qualified African-American and Hispanic firefighter applicants,” stated U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch for the Eastern District of New York.  “We look forward to a new era in which African-American and Hispanic firefighters are full and equal participants in the FDNY’s proud tradition of protecting and serving the people of the city of New York.”

Under the terms of the agreement in principle, the FDNY will pay $98 million to those African-American and Hispanic victims of discrimination who filed claim forms and who have already been found eligible for relief by the court.  The method of distribution has not yet been determined and must be approved by the court before any money is distributed.  With today’s agreement in principle, the parties have committed to streamline the claims process and to expedite the distribution of monetary relief to eligible claimants.

In addition to today’s agreement in principle, the court has already ordered several changes to take place within the FDNY to remedy the city’s discriminatory hiring practices.  In September 2012, the court approved the use of an entry-level firefighter exam which was jointly developed by the United States, the intervening plaintiffs and the city.  As a result, for the first time in at least 15 years, the FDNY is using an entry-level firefighter exam that accurately predicts which candidates will perform better on the job and complies with Title VII.  In May 2013, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld on appeal most of an order outlining changes that must be made to the FDNY’s recruiting, post-examination hiring and Equal Employment Opportunities Office processes, and appointing a court monitor to oversee this reform.  In addition, the court has ordered the city to appoint up to 293 eligible claimants as priority hires to the FDNY, provided that they take and pass all of the same tests and other steps in the hiring process as the other candidates for appointment with the FDNY.  The first groups of priority hires joined the FDNY in July 2013 and January 2014, and additional priority hires are expected to join in July 2014.

JUSTICE DEPT. ALLEGES MINNESOTA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION DISCRIMINATED AGAINST FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Monday, November 25, 2013
Justice Department Charges Minn. Condominium Association, Management Company and Property Manager with Discrimination Against Families with Children

The Justice Department filed a lawsuit today against the homeowner’s association, management company and property manager of a Minnetonka, Minn., condominium complex, alleging that they discriminated against families with children in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

“Families with children should have the same ability to enjoy their homes as all other tenants,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels for the department’s Civil Rights Division.  “The department is committed to enforcing the Fair Housing Act and ensuring that housing providers do not enact policies that discriminate against tenants or deprive tenants of certain amenities due to their familial status.”

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, involves the Condominiums of Greenbrier Village, a six-building complex that contains approximately 462 condominium units.  The lawsuit alleges that the Greenbrier Village homeowners association, property management company Gassen Company Inc. and Gassen employee Diane Brown adopted and enforced policies that discriminatorily limited or prohibited children from playing in the complex’s common grounds.

This lawsuit arose as a result of a complaint filed with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by one family with children who lives at Greenbrier Village.  After HUD investigated the complaint, it issued a charge of discrimination and the matter was referred to the department.

“Housing providers cannot impose more restrictive policies on families with children or evict them simply because their children leave the unit,” said HUD Acting Assistant Secretary Bryan Greene for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity.  “HUD and DOJ are committed to enforcing the fair housing rights of all people, including families with children.”

The lawsuit seeks a court order prohibiting future discrimination by the defendants, monetary damages for those harmed by the defendants’ actions and a civil penalty.

“Each person is entitled to fair treatment under the law, a foundation for all thriving communities,” said Acting U.S. Attorney John R. Marti of the District of Minnesota.  “Unfortunately, families with children may be confronted with discrimination in housing.  The Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office will intervene to obtain fair treatment for all Minnesotans.”
         
The federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin and disability.  Individ uals who believe they may have been victims of housing discrimination may contact the department at 1-800-896-7743 or by e-mail at fairhousing@usdoj.gov , or contact HUD at 1-800-669-9777 or through www.hud.gov/fairhousing .

The complaint is an allegation of unlawful conduct.   The allegations still must be proven in federal court.

DOJ FILES LAWSUIT OVER ALLEGED RETALIATION AGAINST A DEAF COUPLE

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Monday, July 29, 2013
Department of Justice Files Lawsuit Against Vero Beach, Fla. Doctor and Medical Practice for Retaliating Against Deaf Couple

The Department of Justice announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against Dr. Hal Brown and Primary Care of the Treasure Coast of Vero Beach, Fla. (PCTC), alleging that the doctor and the medical practice violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by discriminating against Susan and James Liese, who are deaf. The complaint alleges that the doctor and the practice violated the ADA by retaliating against Mr. and Mrs. Liese because they engaged in activities protected under the act.  The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in Ft. Pierce.

According to the Justice Department’s complaint, the doctor and medical practice terminated Mr. and Mrs. Liese as patients because the couple pursued ADA claims against a hospital for not providing effective communication during an emergency surgery.  The hospital is located next door to and affiliated with PCTC.  The complaint alleges that the Lieses threatened the hospital with an ADA suit based on failure to provide sign language interpreter services, and upon learning of the lawsuit, PCTC and Dr. Brown, who was the Liese’s primary doctor at PCTC, immediately terminated the Lieses as patients.

“The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing the provisions of the ADA that protect an individual from retaliation when he or she opposes disability discrimination and prohibit interference with an individual in the exercise of rights granted by the ADA,” said Jocelyn Samuels, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.  “A person cannot be terminated as a patient because he or she asserts the right to effective communication at a hospital.”

The enforcement of the ADA is a top priority of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.  The ADA prohibits retaliation against an individual because they oppose an act that is unlawful under the ADA and because they made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing under the ADA.  The ADA also makes it unlawful to coerce, intimidate, threaten or interfere with any individual exercising their rights protected by the ADA.

DOJ MAKES VIDEO ABOUT EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION AND DISCRIMINATION

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Justice Department Releases Educational Video About Discrimination in Employment Eligibility Verification

The Justice Department announced today the launch of a new educational video to assist employers in avoiding charges of discrimination in the employment eligibility verification form I-9 process and in the use of E-Verify. The video also helps educate employees about their legal rights.  The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) within the department’s Civil Rights Division enforces the anti-discrimination provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which prohibits employers from discriminating against work-authorized individuals in hiring, firing, recruitment or referral for a fee, regardless of their citizenship status or national origin.  The law also prohibits discrimination during the form I-9 and E-Verify processes.

OSC developed its latest video to address issues that frequently arise from calls to its hotline and charges filed. Employers sometimes incorrectly believe that they need to request more documents than are necessary for the employment eligibility verification form I-9.  Additionally, employers using E-Verify may improperly request specific documents due to misunderstanding of E-Verify requirements.  OSC’s new video highlights some practices that are not permissible and may lead to claims under the anti-discrimination provision.

“We believe this video will help both employers and employees across the country understand employment eligibility verification rules,” said Gregory Friel, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.  “Federal law prohibits discrimination in the employment eligibility verification process, and the Justice Department is committed to enforcing the law.”

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S STATEMENT ON INTERNATIONAL ROMA DAY

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Statement Commemorating International Roma Day, April 8, 2013
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
April 6, 2013
　

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I want to send best wishes to all Roma on the occasion of International Roma Day. We mark the day by celebrating the rich Romani culture and the diverse contributions of Roma to our societies. On this day, we should reflect on the obstacles that continue to prevent millions of Roma from realizing their potential.

Roma continue to face wide-ranging discrimination in access to education, employment, housing, and healthcare. In recent years, the global economic crisis slowed progress to address these challenges and led to growing anti-Roma rhetoric and, even more alarming, violence. The walling off of some Roma villages from neighboring areas and the eviction of entire communities of Roma families from their homes vividly illustrates their exclusion and isolation. We cannot ignore these deeply troubling developments. No country can meet 21st century challenges with a large segment of its population uneducated and excluded.

The United States reaffirms its determination to meet this challenge, together with European governments, civil society, and through international organizations such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, to achieve equality, opportunity, and inclusion for all Roma.

DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS AT EMPLOYMENT AGENCY SETTLED

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Justice Department Settles Claims of Discrimination Against Philadelphia Employment Agency

The Justice Department announced today that it reached a settlement agreement with Best Packing Services Employment Agency Inc., which is based in Philadelphia, resolving allegations that the company discriminated under the anti-discrimination provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), when it impermissibly delayed the start date of two refugees after requiring them to provide specific Form I-9 documentation.
　
In two charges filed with the department, the refugees alleged that they were not allowed to begin employment until they produced unexpired, Department of Homeland Security-issued employment authorization documents, despite the fact that they initially presented sufficient documentation for employment eligibility verification purposes. The charging parties had presented unexpired state identification cards and unrestricted Social Security cards at the time of hire. Both were permanently work-authorized but lost several weeks’ worth of wages as a result of Best Packing’s practices. The department’s investigation revealed that Best Packing did not demand specific Form I-9 documentation from U.S. citizens, but allowed them to provide state identification cards and unrestricted Social Security cards. The anti-discrimination provision prohibits treating employees differently in the employment eligibility verification and reverification processes based on citizenship status or national origin.
　
As part of the settlement, Best Packing will undertake immediate corrective action to address and rectify its employment eligibility verification policies and practices. As part of its corrective action, Best Packing will provide full back pay to both victims. Under the settlement agreement, the company agrees to pay $4,379 in back pay, to conform all of its actions to ensure compliance with the INA’s anti-discrimination provision and to train its human resources personnel about the company’s responsibility to avoid discrimination in the employment eligibility verification process.
　
"The Civil Rights Division is pleased that Best Packing has prioritized compliance with the Immigration and Nationality Act," said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. "We encourage all employers to evaluate their policies and practices to ensure compliance with the INA’s anti-discrimination provision."
　
The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices is responsible for enforcing the anti-discrimination provision of the INA, which protects work-authorized individuals from employment discrimination on the basis of citizenship status or national origin discrimination, including discrimination in hiring and the employment eligibility verification process.