No. 18-1398
Anica Ashbourne v. Donna Hansberry, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: administrative-proceedings brown-v-gen-services-adm brown-vs-board chandler-v-roudebush civil-rights civil-rights-act discrimination-claims due-process equal-employment-opportunity equal-employment-opportunity-act federal-sector-employee title-vii trial-de-novo
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
Upon exhaustion of the administrative proceedings, did 42 U.S.C. §2000e-16(c) provide Anica Ashbourne with an unconditional right to a trial de novo on her discrimination claims flied pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Did the courts abuse their judicial authority when they ignored Brown v. Gen 7 Services Adm., 425 U.S. 820 (1976) and Chandler v. Roudebush, 425 U.S. 840 (1976), by relying on 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5 to dismiss a complaint that was filed under 42 U.S.C. §2000e-16?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did 42 U.S.C. §2000e-16(c) provide Anica Ashbourne with an unconditional right to a trial de novo on her discrimination claims filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2019-06-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-05-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-02-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 7, 2019)
2018-11-27
Application (18A547) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until February 2, 2019.
2018-11-25
Application (18A547) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 4, 2018 to February 2, 2019, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Attorneys
Anica Ashbourne
Anica Ashbourne — Petitioner
UNITED STATES
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent