Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[53] [54] In 2009, constitutional law scholar Tiffany G. Graham noted there was "inherent ambiguity...built into the amendment", [55] and the executive director of Equality Ohio, Sue Doerfer, stated in 2017 that the amendment "legitimized discrimination" against same-sex couples in the state and "adversely" affected gay people.
Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (1991), was a United States Supreme Court case that re-examined the Batson Challenge. [1] Established by Batson v.Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), the Batson Challenge [2] prohibits jury selectors from using peremptory challenges on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, and sex.
This is an accepted version of this page This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 21 December 2024. Landmark U.S. civil rights and labor law This article is about the 1964 Civil Rights Act. For other American laws called the Civil Rights Acts, see Civil Rights Act. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Long title An Act to enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the ...
Malby Law (1895) [9] Ives-Quinn Act; Marriage Equality Act (2011) Dignity for All Students Act (2010) New York Human Rights Law (1945) Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (2019) Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act (2002) CROWN Act (2019) Oregon Oregon Constitution, Article I, §46 (2014) CROWN Act (2021) Pennsylvania
In McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973), the Supreme Court held that, in order to survive a motion for summary judgment, a plaintiff alleging discrimination under Title VII must make a prima facie showing of discrimination, the first in a series of shifting burdens of proof known as McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting.
Brent said Wednesday's vote was like chipping away at an iceberg. Passing House Bill 178 won't solve hair discrimination in Ohio, but it's an important first step. "All Ohioans should be able to ...
The Ohio Supreme Court holds that "the Ohio Constitution is a document of independent force," however. Ohio courts are free to grant Ohioans greater rights than those afforded under federal law. [11] Additionally, the Ohio Constitution contains several rights not found in the U.S. Constitution.
Plan to overhaul legal weed: Ohio senators want to make major changes to marijuana law OK'd by voters, ax home grow Issue 2 is about more than smoking weed. How it would be a step in freeing ...