WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court expanded the scope of a landmark gender equity law, ruling Tuesday that it shields whistleblowers who accuse academic institutions of discrimination based on sex.
The 5-4 decision in favor of Alabama high school girls basketball coach Roderick Jackson is a victory for women’s advocates who say the legal protection will prompt reports of bias that would otherwise go unsaid or unheeded.
The ruling means Jackson can pursue a lawsuit claiming he was fired for complaining that the boys team received better treatment. Congress intended such lawsuits when it passed the Title IX law, justices said.
Justice Clarence Thomas was among the four dissenters: Whistleblowers shouldn’t be given protection unless Congress explicitly says so, said Thomas and three other justices who voted no. They noted that other civil rights laws have specific provisions addressing retaliation.
Under the ruling, schools now may be forced to pay compensatory and punitive damages for retaliation claims, something that was never contemplated when they chose to accept federal funding, the dissenting justices said.
For information and resources related to discrimination, please click here.
More from LawInfo.com
Is the shield law unnecessary as Justice Thomas explains, or will it effectively protect whistleblowers? Please post your comments below.



WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court expanded the scope of a landmark gender equity law, ruling Tuesday that it shields whistleblowers who accuse academic institutions of discrimination based on sex.
The 5-4 decision in favor of Alabama high school girls basketball coach Roderick Jackson is a victory for women’s advocates who say the legal protection will prompt reports of bias that would otherwise go unsaid or unheeded.
The ruling means Jackson can pursue a lawsuit claiming he was fired for complaining that the boys team received better treatment. Congress intended such lawsuits when it passed the Title IX law, justices said.
Justice Clarence Thomas was among the four dissenters: Whistleblowers shouldn’t be given protection unless Congress explicitly says so, said Thomas and three other justices who voted no. They noted that other civil rights laws have specific provisions addressing retaliation.
Under the ruling, schools now may be forced to pay compensatory and punitive damages for retaliation claims, something that was never contemplated when they chose to accept federal funding, the dissenting justices said.
For information and resources related to discrimination, please click here.
More from LawInfo.com
Is the shield law unnecessary as Justice Thomas explains, or will it effectively protect whistleblowers? Please post your comments below.



New Posts
-
School Lunch Police Reject Homemade Lunches
15 hours ago
by Caitlyn Obolsky, Esq.
-
Recent Recalls: Consumer Products
15 hours ago
by Caitlyn Obolsky, Esq.
-
Frequently Asked Legal Questions: Lemon Law
2 days ago
by Caitlyn Obolsky, Esq.
-
DOJ Files Information After Gout Drug Linked to 3 Deaths
2 days ago
by Caitlyn Obolsky, Esq.
-
Are You Buying Counterfeit Goods?
2 days ago
by Chris Blankinship, Esq.
-
School Lunch Police Reject Homemade Lunches
Facebook Fans
Popular Posts
- Is a Captain Legally Obligated to Stay Aboard His Ship After a Crash? (39244 views)
- Pfizer Recalls Birth Control Pills (369 views)
- Pair Denied Entry into the United States Due to Tweets (323 views)
- California Police Officer Shot And Killed By Fellow Officers (267 views)
- Partying Pictures on Facebook Lead to Denial of Workers' Compensation Benefits (251 views)
Topics
Attorney Marketing (4)
Automobile Accidents (47)
Aviation Accidents/Disasters (25)
Bankruptcy Law (45)
Brain Injury / Brain Trauma (47)
Business Law (86)
CA suits (47)
Catastrophic Injury (84)
Celebrity (39)
Class Actions (72)
Constitutional (103)
Corporate & Securities Law (24)
Criminal Law (232)
Current Events (320)
Dangerous Products / Defective Products (162)
Divorce (15)
Dog Bites (11)
DoOver (30)
Drugs (22)
Drunk Driving (49)
DUI (51)
Dumb or Weird Laws (25)
DWI (45)
Education (13)
En Español (7)
Entertainment Law (13)
Estate Planning (31)
Family Law (66)
Federal (158)
Frequently Asked Questions (12)
General (380)
Historical Cases (5)
How-To's (24)
immigration (12)
Immigration Law (40)
Intellectual Property (19)
Labor & Employment Law (54)
Landlord – Tenant (15)
Law Enforcement (6)
LawSmart (3)
Lead Counsel (710)
Lead Counsel Guest Attorneys (114)
Lead Counsel Corner (987)
Lead Counsel News (311)
Legal Trends (96)
Litigation (133)
Medical Malpractice (52)
OUI (13)
Personal Injury (180)
Press Releases (25)
Prisons (4)
Privacy (32)
Products Liability (78)
Recall (135)
Slip and Fall / Trip and Fall (39)
Spinal Cord Injury (31)
Sports (7)
Tax Law (17)
Torts (36)
Unfair Insurance Practices / Insurance Bad Faith (12)
Workers' Compensation (22)
Wrongful Death (91)







