diane williams attorney when she sued justice department

Who was Diane Williams' supervisor?

In the suit, Diane Williams, the plaintiff, alleged that she had had a good working relationship with Harvey Brinson, her supervisor at the U.S. Justice Department where she was employed as a public information specialist, up until she refused a sexual advance made by Mr. Brinson in June of 1972. Ms. Williams, an African American woman asserted that thereafter Mr. Brinson engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of harassment and humiliation of her, including but not limited to, unwarranted reprimands, refusal to inform her of matters for the performance. Eventually, Ms. Williams was terminated from her position in September of 1972.

What case changed the face of discrimination and harassment in the workplace?

Since Title VII changed the face of discrimination and harassment in the workplace, a bevy of landmark cases have helped set important precedents for distressed workers across the country. In 1976, the case of Williams v.

What was the landmark sexual harassment case?

Before the passing of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, bosses could fire their secretaries for not sleeping with them, without fear of legal recourse. You could sexually harass anyone in your company and never experience any consequences. Since Title VII changed the face of ...

Who was the woman who helped found Working Women United?

With activists from Cornell’s Human Affairs Office and civil-rights lawyers like Eleanor Holmes Norton—who was, at the time, NYC’s commissioner of human rights—Wood helped found Working Women United. The group held speak-outs to illuminate the scope of a problem newly called sexual harassment, but it didn’t stop there.

Who was the woman who was sexually harassed by Clarence Thomas?

In 1975, nearly two decades before Anita Hill, now a professor at Brandeis, testified that she was sexually harassed by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Carmita Wood resigned from her job at a Cornell University lab.

What are the lessons of anti-sexual harassment?

Here are three valuable lessons from the early years of anti–sexual harassment activism: (1) an injury to one is an injury to all; (2) black women deserve credit for early leadership on this issue; and (3) no single individual deserves credit for a movement of many. A multiracial, mixed-class coalition of women and men from civil-rights groups, ...

What was the first sexual harassment case?

Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson was the first sexual-harassment case to reach the Supreme Court. In 1986, citing Norton’s EEOC guidelines, the Court ruled unanimously that sexual harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

What was the significance of the Barnes v. Bundy case?

Barnes’s case led to a 1977 appeals-court ruling that sexual harassment is sex discrimination under the Civil Rights Act. And Bundy’s case led to a 1981 ruling that established that it’s possible to bring a sexual-harassment claim under Title VII even if the harassment does not result in job loss.

Why are blue collar women important?

Blue-collar women were also instrumental in broadening our understanding of sexual harassment, in part because, like black women, they experienced a lot of it. In 1988, a group of women miners filed the first class-action sexual-harassment lawsuit in the United States.

Who drafted the anti-harassment clause?

Norton drafted an anti–sexual harassment clause for affirmative-action agreements, a precursor to the sexual-harassment guidelines she would issue in 1980 as chair of the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Who decides whether to appeal in District Court?

The judges side with us on some issues and side with the Department of Justice on some issues. Each party then decides whether to appeal and/or proceed in District Court.

Is Eric Holder immune from lawsuits?

They determine that former Attorney General Eric Holder is not entitled to immunity from lawsuits such as mine. They decide that we had inadequate time in discovery to learn the identities of the “John Doe” federal agents who conducted the remote computer intrusions and surveillance.

Is the Department of Justice the accused?

But in this case, the Department of Justice is also “the accused.” And they’ve shown no desire to seriously investigate themselves; quite the opposite.

Is a civil suit necessary?

A civil suit wouldn’t be necessary to obtain accountability, it would be handled by government prosecutors. But in this case, the Department of Justice is also “the accused.”. And they’ve shown no desire to seriously investigate themselves; quite the opposite.

Is civil suit a costly alternative?

The civil suit is a costly alternative. The person filing it is required to self-finance his own pursuit of justice.

Is a civil suit necessary to obtain accountability?

This case is further complicated by the fact that the Department of Justice would normally be expected to launch a national security or criminal probe into an unlawful computer intrusion of a journalist. A civil suit wouldn’t be necessary to obtain accountability, it would be handled by government prosecutors.