Ruling upholds jury finding that ongoing workplace actions following objections to stereotypical comments about African men supported a retaliatory hostile work environment claim under Title VII.
A police officer who objected after a supervisor allegedly made stereotypical comments about African men presented sufficient evidence for a jury to find that Prince George’s County subjected him to a retaliatory hostile work environment in violation of Title VII. A federal court in Maryland concluded that the officer’s informal verbal disagreement constituted protected activity under the statute’s opposition clause and that retaliatory hostile work environment claims are governed by a lower standard than substantive hostile work environment claims. Upholding a reduced $300,000 damages award, the court determined that the evidence permitted the jury to find that the officer’s workplace relationship with the supervisor deteriorated after he challenged remarks characterizing African men as aggressive, and rejected Prince George’s County’s request for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial (Magassouba v. Prince George’s County, Maryland, No. 8:23-cv-00767-TJS (D. Md. May 19, 2026)).
The police officer sued Prince George’s County and several supervisory officials, alleging race discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII, the Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act, Sections 1981 and 1983, and the Maryland Declaration of Rights. He alleged...
After Saudi Arabia announced in October 2026 it had executed two Bangladeshi nationals for what it called "indecent act" at a mosque, a photo and videos circulated online with a false claim they s...