29 C.F.R. § 1606.5

Citizenship requirements

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In those circumstances, where citizenship requirements have the purpose or effect of discriminating against an individual on the basis of national origin, they are prohibited by title VII. 2

2 See Espinoza v. Farah Mfg. Co., Inc., 414 U.S. 86, 92 (1973). See also, E.O. 11935, 5 CFR 7.4; and 31 U.S.C. 699(b), for citizenship requirements in certain Federal employment.

(b) Some State laws prohibit the employment of non-citizens. Where these laws are in conflict with title VII, they are superseded under section 708 of the title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2024 · leading case: State, Dep't of Revenue v. Andrade, 23 P.3d 58 (Alaska 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State, Dep't of Revenue v. Andrade, 23 P.3d 58 (Alaska 2001). “29 C.F.R. § 1606.5 (a). 120 . 1975 Formal Op.”

Anderson, Vicente J. v. Zubieta, Alberto, 180 F.3d 329 (D.C. Cir. 1999). “See also 29 C.F.R. § 1606.5 (a) (EEOC regulation) (“[Wjhere citizenship requirements have the purpose or effect of discriminating against an individual on the basis of national origin, they are prohibited by [T]i-tle VIL”).”

United States Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Technocrest Sys., Inc., 448 F.3d 1035 (8th Cir. 2006). “334 ; see also 29 C.F.R. § 1606.5 (a) (“In those circumstances, where citizenship requirements have the purpose or effect of discriminating against an individual on the basis of national origin, they are prohibited by Title VIL”) (citing Espinoza, 414 U.”

Farazi v. Oracle of Am. Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024). “]” 29 CFR § 1606.5 (a). 1 Title VII requires a plaintiff to file charges with the EEOC within 180 days of the 2 discriminatory action, extending to 300 days if the employee has filed an analogous claim under 3 state law.”

Liu v. BASF Corp., 609 F. Supp. 2d 828 (S.D. Iowa 2009). “There is no evidence BPS discriminates against aliens in its employment practices, much less that any such practice has had the purpose or effect of discriminating against persons of Chinese national origin. 12 . In responding to BPS’s statement of facts and in his brief Mr.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.