Search Details

Word: scalia (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: during 1990-1999
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...unanimous decision written by one of the most conservative Justices, Antonin Scalia, the court said men who sexually harass other men (and women who harass women) are discriminating against them and thus breaking a law, the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It was only 12 years ago that the court ruled for the first time that sexual harassment--a vague term that most often includes unwelcome come-ons and touching--amounted to discrimination. That decision was seen as an advance for women suffering abuse from lecherous bosses and co-workers, and indeed nearly 9 of every 10 sexual harassment claims...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Harassed Or Hazed? | 3/16/1998 | See Source »

Brutal, yes. But illegal sexual harassment? Even after the Supreme Court's ruling, Oncale might not convince a jury that Sundowner and its men discriminated against him. Scalia's brief opinion merely allows the possibility for the first time. Sundowner attorney Harry Reasoner says his clients deny the shower incident. They admit to roughhousing with Oncale, but they didn't single him out for special abuse, Reasoner says. "All males who go onto an offshore platform are subject to a kind of hazing." Reasoner also points out that Oncale could have brought state assault charges against the men but went...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Harassed Or Hazed? | 3/16/1998 | See Source »

Oncale will have to convince a jury that he was discriminated against "because of" his gender. That's what the Civil Rights Act says. Scalia noted that behavior with mere "sexual content" isn't necessarily illegal. There's no law against acting like a sex-crazed boor--so long as one acts that way to men and women alike. The court isn't creating any "general civility code," Scalia noted...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Harassed Or Hazed? | 3/16/1998 | See Source »

...however, the high court left wide open what it does mean to discriminate "because of" gender. A lower court had held that male-on-male harassment counts as discrimination only if the harasser is gay, since the gay harasser is clearly choosing his victim because of his gender. And Scalia agreed that homosexuality could be contributing evidence. This part of the ruling could lead to investigations that "out" accused harassers to prove discrimination...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Harassed Or Hazed? | 3/16/1998 | See Source »

Last week most lesbians and gays praised Scalia's ruling--a first for the Justice--for treating same-sex harassment no differently from that between a man and a woman. But some scholars were worried that the court's insistence on showing a disparity in treatment of men and women could have a perverse effect: "If you see a sexual harassment claim coming, you can just start abusing women too," says Deborah Epstein, who teaches law at Georgetown University. And that could inspire a new legalism: equal-opportunity harasser...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Harassed Or Hazed? | 3/16/1998 | See Source »

Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | Next