The actual Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 document and pen is on display in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., July 1, 2004. REUTERS/Mannie Garcia
A laborer once employed by the city of New Orleans, acting as his own lawyer at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, accomplished something quite remarkable last week.
With some unexpected help from a U.S. Justice Department amicus brief, Anthony Woods persuaded the appeals court that a single use of the most racist epithet in the American vernacular, in certain circumstances, can be sufficient justification for a hostile work environment claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
The ruling appears to be the first in which the 5th Circuit has explicitly allowed an employee to proceed with a Title VII claim based on a single incident in which an employer allegedly used the n-word. In 2004, as Judges Grady Jolly, Don Willett and Andy Oldham noted in last week’s opinion, the 5th Circuit ruled in Mosley v. Marion County that three incidents involving racial slurs were insufficient for a hostile workplace claim, although the appeals court subsequently ruled in 2007’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. WC&M Enterprises Inc that a single incident, if “sufficiently severe” could be the basis of a viable Title VII claim. (That case alleged repeated and pervasive anti-Arab harassment after 9/11, not use of the n-word.)
Woods’ allegations met that standard, the 5th Circuit said in a short...
Letter calling for suspension of Oppenheimer and Ansara from council riddled with untruths, says Ernst Roets UCT witch-hunt built on false claims about Lex Libertas 16 October 2026 Pretoria – The t...