NAWL Joins NWLC Amicus Brief in 5th Circuit Opposing Discriminatory Sex-Based Scheduling Policy

Isabell Retamoza • August 31, 2023

AUGUST 18, 2023 -- UPDATE: On August 18, 2023, the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, overruled the decision made by a three-judge panel in Hamilton v. Dallas County and eliminated the requirement that actionable claims of adverse employment decisions under Title VII must involve an “ultimate employment decision.” For decades, the Fifth Circuit limited liability for employers under Title VII disparate treatment claims to “ultimate employment decisions,” like hiring, firing, promotion, or pay. In this ruling, the court recognized that the text of Title VII contains no such limitation, and instead clearly allows for liability for other discriminatory decisions. The court further ruled that an employee’s work schedules—which in this case, were restricted so women could not take full weekends off—are “quintessential” terms and conditions of employment. The plaintiffs, nine female detention service officers, are now free to demonstrate that the scheduling policy put in place by Dallas County illegally discriminated against them based on sex.

MAY 21, 2021 -- NAWL is proud to join the National Women’s Law Center, along with the ACLU Women’s Rights Project, the ACLU of Texas, our pro bono partners at Katz, Marshall & Banks, and 40 organizations committed to women’s and civil rights, in filing an amicus brief in the 5th Circuit in support of nine Black women working at the Dallas County Jail. The Jail had instituted a policy wherein schedules were restricted by sex—women working at the Jail were not allowed to schedule off the full weekend, but men were allowed to take off both Saturday and Sunday. The County is arguing that the sex-based scheduling policy does not violate Title VII because it does not affect job duties, compensation, or benefits. Our amicus brief details why this policy is sex discrimination under Title VII and the harm to all women—particularly women of color and women with caregiving responsibilities—that occurs when employees are denied the ability to control their work schedules. Read the brief>>

< Older Post

Newer Post >

NAWL Responds to the Supreme Court Decision in Louisiana v. Callais

April 30, 2026

Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Louisiana v. Callais , ruling 6–3 that Louisiana’s congressional map creating a second majority-Black district is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. In reaching that decision, the Court narrowed how Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act may be used to remedy racial vote dilution, despite prior findings that Louisiana’s earlier maps likely infringed on the voting rights of Black residents. This decision marks a serious setback for voting rights and democratic participation. For nearly six decades, the Voting Rights Act has served as a cornerstone of our legal system’s effort to confront and remedy structural discrimination in the electoral process. By restricting the tools available to address unequal representation, the Court’s ruling makes it harder to correct long standing disparities in who has a voice in our elections. In a dissent read aloud from the bench, Justice Elena Kagan cautioned that the Court’s decision undermines one of the last effective tools for protecting fair representation. Describing the ruling’s impact on the Voting Rights Act, she wrote that Section 2 is now “all but a dead letter,” unable to fulfill its core purpose. She highlighted that a democracy cannot function as promised when the law prevents meaningful remedies for electoral systems that lock some communities out of political power. NAWL is committed to a democracy that works for everyone, supported by a legal system that recognizes discrimination and acts to correct it. As lawyers, judges, advocates, and scholars, we understand that voting rights are foundational to all other rights. NAWL will continue to engage its members on the implications of this decision through education and dialogue. We invite NAWL members to continue this important conversation by attending our session “ Louisiana v. Callais : Voting Rights and the Future of Our Democracy” at NAWL’s 2026 Annual Meeting in Chicago on July 22–23 . Hear from Jessica Ellsworth (Partner and Co-Chair, Supreme Court and Appellate Practice at Hogan Lovells), Samuel Spital (Associate Director-Counsel at the Legal Defense Fund), Franita Tolson (Dean of USC Gould School of Law), and Wendy Weiser (Vice President, Democracy at Brennan Center for Justice). Our expert panel will examine the implications of this decision and its future impact on voting rights and the rule of law.

NAWL Joins NWLC Amicus Brief in 5th Circuit Opposing Discriminatory Sex-Based Scheduling Policy

NAWL Responds to the Supreme Court Decision in Louisiana v. Callais

NAWL Joins Amicus Brief in D.C. Circuit to Defend the Rule of Law

NAWL Joins 4th Circuit Amicus Brief in Support of LGBTQ+ Equality

NAWL Joins 8th Circuit Amicus Brief in Support of Transgender Athletes' Rights

NAWL Supports LGBTQ+ Equality in Montana Supreme Court Filing

NAWL Joins 7th Circuit Amicus Brief in Support of Transgender Students' Rights