On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

“Because of Sex”: Federal Protections for LGBT People (Free)

Released on: Dec. 17, 2018
Running Time: 03:01:25
Since the 1970’s and particularly after the Supreme Court’s decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, the issue of whether federal sex discrimination laws protect LGBT people has been litigated all over the country. Courts have evaluated this key legal issue in different ways and in a variety of contexts, resulting in an unpredictable legal landscape for LGBT people and their families. In this session, we will provide a historical analysis of how courts have addressed this issue in the employment, school, and healthcare contexts as well as a roundup of key recent and pending cases to watch. We will also identify emerging issues and detail best practices that employers, schools, and health insurance providers should adopt to protect LGBT people and their families.

Lecture Topics [Total time 03:01:25]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Opening Remarks* [00:02:22]
    Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Historical Background of Sex Discrimination Cases; Current Status of Court Decisions Addressing Discrimination Protections for LGBT People [01:58:19]
    Julie Wilensky, Ria Tabacco Mar, Nonnie L. Shivers
  • Emerging Issues and Best Practices in Sex Discrimination Cases [01:00:44]
    Ria Tabacco Mar, Nonnie L. Shivers, Julie Wilensky

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Gender Identity Discrimination and Sexual Orientation Discrimination as Sex Discrimination in Federal Law (October 15, 2018)
    Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Brief of Amici Curiae ACLU et al. in Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., Case No. 15-3775-cv (2nd Cir. June 26, 2017)
    Julie Wilensky, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Hively v. Ivy Tech (en banc), Case No. 15-1720 (7th Cir. Apr. 4, 2017)
    Ria Tabacco Mar, Nonnie L. Shivers
  • Whitaker v. Kenosha Unified School District, Case No. 16-3522 (7th Cir. May 30, 2017)
    Nonnie L. Shivers, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • What You Should Know About EEOC and the Enforcement Protections for LGBT Workers, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
    Nonnie L. Shivers, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Examples of Policies and Emerging Practices for Supporting Transgender Students, U.S. Department of Education, May 2016
    Nonnie L. Shivers, Julie Wilensky, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • A Guide to Restroom Access for Transgender Workers, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
    Julie Wilensky, Nonnie L. Shivers, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Amici Curiae Brief of School Administrators from Thirty States and the District of Columbia in Doe v. Boyertown Area School District, Case No. 17-3113 (3rd Cir. Jan. 23, 2018)
    Julie Wilensky, Nonnie L. Shivers, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Consent Decree, EEOC v. Deluxe Financial Services, Inc., Case No. 0:15-cv-2646 (ADM/SER) (D. Minn. Jan. 20, 2016)
    Julie Wilensky, Nonnie L. Shivers, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Legal Enforcement Guidance on Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Expression: Local Law No. 3 (2002); N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-102(23), NYC Commission on Human Rights (Revised June 28, 2016)
    Julie Wilensky, Nonnie L. Shivers, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • Transgender Rights in the Workplace, California Department of Fair Employment and Housing
    Nonnie L. Shivers, Julie Wilensky, Ria Tabacco Mar
  • An Insider’s Look at California’s New Gender Identity Regulations: Restroom Access, Pronoun Preference, and More, Ogletree Deakins
    Nonnie L. Shivers
  • “Because of Sex”: Federal Protections for LGBT People (PowerPoint slides)
    Ria Tabacco Mar, Nonnie L. Shivers, Julie Wilensky

Presentation Material

  • “Because of Sex”: Federal Protections for LGBT People (PowerPoint slides)
    Ria Tabacco Mar, Nonnie L. Shivers, Julie Wilensky
Co-Chair(s)
Ria Tabacco Mar ~ Senior Staff Attorney, ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender & HIV Project
Julie Wilensky ~ Senior Staff Attorney, National Center for Lesbian Rights
Speaker(s)
Nonnie L. Shivers ~ Shareholder, Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart P.C.
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period. Effective January 1, 2019, the limit of distance education per reporting period will increase from 9 to 18 credits.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

“Because of Sex”: Federal Protections for LGBT People Ria Tabacco Mar, ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender & HIV Project
Julie Wilensky, National Center for Lesbian Rights
 
Share
Email
“I very much appreciated this program! It was very informative and the instructors communicated their knowledge of the areas of law with great clarity and expertise. Thank you!”
- Dale Melchert, Staff Attorney
  The New York City Anti-Violence Project

“Very thorough, very knowledgeable and articulate speakers.  Really enjoyed the explanation by circuit of the current holdings.”
- Freeda Louthan, Attorney at Law
  The Villages, FL


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2019 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2019 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.