NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 95-28.1 (2026)

Discrimination against any person possessing sickle cell trait or hemoglobin C trait prohibited

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 95 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No person, firm, corporation, unincorporated association, State agency, unit of local government or any public or private entity shall deny or refuse employment to any person or discharge any person  from employment on account of the fact such person possesses sickle cell trait or hemoglobin C trait. The term "sickle cell trait" is defined as the condition wherein the major natural hemoglobin components present in the blood of the individual are hemoglobin A (normal) and hemoglobin S (sickle hemoglobin) as defined by standard chemical and physical analytic techniques, including electrophoresis; and the proportion of hemoglobin A is greater than the proportion of hemoglobin S or one natural parent of the individual is shown to have only normal hemoglobin components (hemoglobin A, hemoglobin A2, hemoglobin F) in the normal proportions by standard chemical and physical analytic tests. The term "hemoglobin C trait" is defined as the condition wherein the major natural hemoglobin components present in the blood of the individual are hemoglobin A (normal) and hemoglobin C as defined by standard chemical and physical analytic techniques, including electrophoresis; and the proportion of hemoglobin A is greater than the proportion of hemoglobin C or one natural parent of the individual is shown to have only normal hemoglobin components (hemoglobin A, hemoglobin A2, hemoglobin F) in the normal proportions by standard chemical and physical analytic tests, provided, however, that this section shall not be construed to give employment, promotion, or layoff preference to persons who possess the above traits, or to prevent such persons being discharged for cause. (1975, c. 463, s. 1.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2002–2012 · leading case: Johnson v. North Carolina, 905 F. Supp. 2d 712 (W.D.N.C. 2012).
Johnson v. North Carolina, 905 F. Supp. 2d 712 (W.D.N.C. 2012). “G.S. 95-28.1. e. Article 16 of Chapter 127A of the General Statutes.”
Fleming v. State Univ. of New York, 502 F. Supp. 2d 324 (E.D.N.Y 2007). “075 (2007) (prohibiting employment discrimination based on presence of sickle cell trait); N.C. Gen.Stat. § 95-28.1 (2006) (same). Finally, plaintiff himself alleges such discrimination; according to the complaint, Yuma offered him a job, only to revoke its offer upon learning…”
Wiley v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 227 F. Supp. 2d 480 (M.D.N.C. 2002). “G.S. 95-28.1. e. Article 16 of Chapter 127A of the General Statutes.”
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.