Supreme Court set to decide major labor cases
A month long wait hasn't kept Supreme Court watchers from looking forward to opening arguments and some expected key labor-related rulings.
September 11, 2013 at 08:13 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Judicial watchdogs have about one month to wait until the Supreme Court opens its doors for arguments on Oct. 7. However, that has not kept people from examining the cases the Court will hear, and some key labor-related rulings should shape policy moving forward.
One of the first cases to watch will be Schuette v Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, with arguments currently scheduled for Oct. 15. After the Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's affirmative-action plan ten years ago, affirmative-action opponents launched a campaign to pass a Michigan state amendment banning racial preferences at public employers and universities. The amendment passed in 2009, but the 6th Circuit then struck it down in a 2011 divided decision.
Watchers such as Daniel Fisher of Forbes believe the conservative majority of the court is likely to reverse the 6th Circuit and follow the minority opinion of 6th Circuit Judge Jeffery Sutton, who said, “A first premise for resolving this case is, and must be, that a State does not deny equal treatment by mandating it.” This comes after the Court remanded a similar case in Fisher v. Texas earlier this year.
However, that's not the only key labor-specific case to watch for Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action will allow the Court to rule on whether the Obama administration's use of statistics-based disparate-impact theories to prove racial discrimination holds up against the law. If the city of Mt. Holly, N.J., wins against the disparate-impact theories, then Fisher says racial discrimination claims against businesses will be tougher to prove.
Lawson v. FMR should also have a major impact in the workplace, this time with whistleblower protection at stake. The Court earlier this year expanded whistleblower protections under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) to include more than just protections related to shareholder fraud. However, Lawson will provide a ruling of whether SOX protections also extend to employees of contractors and subcontractors as well. Fidelity (FMR) claims SOX was never intended to stretch that far, while an administrative court ruled that whistleblower protection held for all.
Judicial watchdogs have about one month to wait until the Supreme Court opens its doors for arguments on Oct. 7. However, that has not kept people from examining the cases the Court will hear, and some key labor-related rulings should shape policy moving forward.
One of the first cases to watch will be Schuette v Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, with arguments currently scheduled for Oct. 15. After the Court upheld the
Watchers such as Daniel Fisher of Forbes believe the conservative majority of the court is likely to reverse the 6th Circuit and follow the minority opinion of 6th Circuit Judge Jeffery Sutton, who said, “A first premise for resolving this case is, and must be, that a State does not deny equal treatment by mandating it.” This comes after the Court remanded a similar case in Fisher v. Texas earlier this year.
However, that's not the only key labor-specific case to watch for Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action will allow the Court to rule on whether the Obama administration's use of statistics-based disparate-impact theories to prove racial discrimination holds up against the law. If the city of Mt. Holly, N.J., wins against the disparate-impact theories, then Fisher says racial discrimination claims against businesses will be tougher to prove.
Lawson v. FMR should also have a major impact in the workplace, this time with whistleblower protection at stake. The Court earlier this year expanded whistleblower protections under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) to include more than just protections related to shareholder fraud. However, Lawson will provide a ruling of whether SOX protections also extend to employees of contractors and subcontractors as well. Fidelity (FMR) claims SOX was never intended to stretch that far, while an administrative court ruled that whistleblower protection held for all.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMeta Hires Litigation Strategy Chief, Tapping King & Spalding Partner Who Was Senior DOJ Official in First Trump Term
What to Know About the New 'Overlapping Directorship' Antitrust Development
4 minute readThe Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
Tesla, Musk Appeal Chancery Compensation Case to Delaware Supreme Court
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Fulton DA Seeks to Overturn Her Disqualification From Trump Georgia Election Case
- 2The FTC’s Noncompete Rule Is Likely Dead
- 3COVID-19 Vaccine Suit Against United Airlines Hangs on Right-to-Sue Letter Date
- 4People in the News—Jan. 10, 2025—Lamb McErlane, Saxton & Stump
- 5How I Made Partner: 'Be Open With Partners About Your Strengths,' Says Ha Jin Lee of Sullivan & Cromwell
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250