Confronted with a claim of discriminatory termination or retaliation, an employer’s defensive strategy most often centers on marshalling facts and evidence to—eventually—support a motion for summary judgment that leans heavily—if not exclusively—on the argument that any adverse employment actions taken were based on legitimate and non-discriminatory business reasons that the employee will not be able to show were pretextual. This approach began with the burden-shifting framework described by the Supreme Court in its seminal 1973 decision, McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … Read the rest
Inspectors with the Food and Drug Administration are tracking a new outbreak of infections from Listeria monocytogenes.
So far there are three confirmed patients. The FDA has not reported the ages of the patients or where they live.
There are likely many more sick people than have been confirmed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that for every patient confirmed in a Salmonella outbreak there are 29 patients who go undetected. This is because some patients do not … Read the rest
Share
The Supreme Court on Tuesday left in place a federal appeals court ruling that bars the city of Tulsa from enforcing municipal ordinances against Native Americans. In a brief unsigned order without any public dissents, the justices rejected the city’s request to put a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit on hold to give the city time to appeal.
The order came in a case arising from a nearly five-year-old traffic ticket and … Read the rest
Share
The Supreme Court on Friday night granted a request from the Biden administration and a drug manufacturer to put on hold a ruling by a federal judge in Texas that suspended the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, part of a two-drug protocol used to end pregnancies in their early stages. The battle over medication abortions, which account for over half of all abortions performed in the United States each year, now returns to the U.S. Court of … Read the rest
Share
Both oral advocates faced fairly cold receptions on Monday morning in United States v. Hansen when the Supreme Court heard argument on whether 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(iv), the federal law that criminalizes “encouraging or inducing” an immigrant to come or remain in the United States unlawfully, violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech.
The argument also shed more light on the newer justices’ views on the freedom of speech. The newly reconfigured Court appears less strongly … Read the rest