Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964
The comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC 2000a et seq., prohibits discrimination on the basis or race, sex, color, religion, or national origin in public accommodations, public facilities, public schools, federally assisted programs, and employment opportunities. The act further prohibits retaliation against an individual for exercising his or her rights under the act. 42 USC 2000e-3(a).
Employment Law Under the Federal Civil Rights Act
Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants or employees on the basis of membership in one of the enumerated protected groups. 42 USC 2000e-2(a)(1), (2). An employer is defined under 42 USC 2000e(b) as “a person … who has fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.” In determining whether the 15-employee threshold is met, the U.S. Supreme Court has adopted the “payroll method” and has determined that for purposes of Title VII, an individual who is on the employer’s payroll on the day in question counts as an employee, regardless of whether the individual actually works or receives compensation on any given day. Walters v Metropolitan Educ Enters, 519 US 202, 212 (1997).
The threshold number of employees for application of Title VII is an element of a plaintiff’s claim for relief, not a jurisdictional issue. Thus, an objection based on the employee numerosity requirement must be raised before the close of trial on the merits; it is not a subject matter jurisdiction objection that can be raised at any time. Arbaugh v Y&H Corp, 546 US 500 (2006).
Generally, individual liability is not allowed under Title VII, unless the individual qualifies as the “alter ego” of the employer. Hall v State Farm Ins Co, 18 F Supp 2d 751 (ED Mich 1998).
Title VII protection extends to both current and former employees. Robinson v Shell Oil Co, 519 US 337 (1997). In Robinson, a former employee who had previously filed a race discrimination claim with the EEOC sought to amend his complaint to allege retaliation after defendant gave a negative reference concerning plaintiff to a potential employer. The Court held that such a claim was viable under Title VII, rejecting defendant’s contention that plaintiff, who no longer worked for defendant, was not an “employee” within the meaning of the act.
To file suit under Title VII, an employee must first file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC.
Public Accommodation Under the Federal Civil Rights Act
Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC 2000a(a), forbids discrimination or segregation on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin in places of public accommodation, if their operations affect commerce or if the discrimination or segregation is supported by state action. Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 contains no proscription against discrimination on the basis of sex. An aggrieved person may institute a civil action for injunctive relief, including an application for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order. 42 USC 2000a-3(a). The private remedy granted by this section is for injunctive relief only and gives no right to a claim for damages or to a trial by jury. Adams v Fazzio Real Estate Co, 268 F Supp 630 (ED La 1967), aff’d, 396 F2d 146 (5th Cir 1968).
Education Requirements Under the Federal Civil Rights Act
Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC 2000c-9; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC 2000d et seq.; Title VIII of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 USC 1651–1656; Title IX, 20 USC 1681–1688; and Title II of the Education Amendments of 1974, 20 USC 1701 et seq. prohibit discrimination in public schools and colleges on the basis of race, color, or national origin, and, under some circumstances, on the basis of sex or religion. Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were designed to desegregate public schools. However, neither the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Education Amendments of 1972, nor the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 can be construed to require the assignment of students or teachers to overcome a racial imbalance, and the failure of an educational agency to attain a balance on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin does not constitute a denial of equal educational opportunity or equal protection of the laws.
In Jackson v Birmingham Bd of Educ, 544 US 167 (2005), the U.S. Supreme Court held that Title IX’s private right of action encompasses claims of retaliation for complaints about sex discrimination.
The Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 specifically provides that an individual denied equal educational opportunity may institute a civil action for such relief as may be appropriate. Both Title VIII of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 provide that the parent or guardian of a child, or the parents or guardians of children similarly situated, transported to a public school in accordance with a court order, may seek to reopen or intervene in the further implementation of such court order, currently in effect, if the time or distance of travel is so great that it risks the health of the student or significantly impinge on the student’s educational process.
In Wade v University of Michigan, No 330555, 2017 Mich App LEXIS 904 (June 6, 2017), the court of appeals held that the University of Michigan’s ordinance prohibiting firearms on university property did not violate plaintiff’s Second Amendment rights.
- The court found that under District of Columbia v Heller, 554 US 570 (2008), the Second Amendment does not reach “sensitive places,” which includes schools and therefore the university.
Housing Regulation Under the Federal Civil Rights Act
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits race, color, and national origin discrimination in “any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” including federally assisted public housing. 42 USC 2000d. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin, in the sale or rental of dwellings, in residential real estate transactions, or in the provision of brokerage services. 42 USC 3604 et seq.
Under the provisions of the fair housing act, any person who has been injured by a discriminatory housing practice or believes he or she is about to be irrevocably injured by such a practice may file a written complaint with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The complaint must be filed within 180 days after the alleged discriminatory housing practice. If the HUD Secretary has been unable to obtain voluntary compliance within 30 days, the aggrieved person may commence a civil action. Wherever a state or local fair housing law provides rights and remedies that are substantially equivalent to those provided by the act, the HUD Secretary must notify the appropriate state or local agency of any complaint that appears to constitute a violation of the state or local fair housing law and take no further action if, within 30 days, the state or local enforcement official commences proceedings in the matter.