On December 8, 2014, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a case that could have significant implications for the ability to use the federal courts to challenge state attempts to tax remote sellers of goods.
Yesterday evening the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed its Reply Brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Mach Mining v. EEOC, Case No. 13-1019.
This month marked the opening of the Supreme Court’s new term. For employment law practitioners, this session will be particularly busy with seven cases analyzing a range of employment questions, from the scope of the EEOC’s duty to conciliate discrimination claims (Mach Mining v. EEOC, oral argument set for January 2015 or later) to the applicability of a whistleblower protection law to employees who make disclosures “specifically prohibited by law” (Dep’t of Homeland Security v. MacLean, oral argument November 8).
On October 2, 2014, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. v. Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, No. 13-1371, to decide whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Of interest, the Court declined to grant cert. on the question of the appropriate standard for evaluating disparate impact claims.
On Monday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Henderson v. United States, a case that the Eleventh Circuit decided earlier this year.