Wen Chiann Yeh v. North Carolina State University, et al.

I. Weather, as the Second, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits have held, the Faragher and Ellerth "supervisor" liability rule (i) applies to discrimination, harassment by those whom the employer vests with authority to direct and oversee their victim's daily work, or (ii). Is limited to those harassers who have the power to "hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline" their victim. II. Whether discrimination against an employee because of racial orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination 'because of... sex, nationality, race' within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." III. Whether The Court decided that an employer may be liable for sexual and racial discrimination and wrongdoing caused by a supervisor, but liability depends on the reasonableness of the employer's conduct, as well as the reasonableness of the plaintiff victim's conduct. IV. Whether this court enacted in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to allow Plaintiff to recover by showing that race was merely a "motivating factor" in a defense decision. V. Whether Discovery evidences are sufficient intervening circumstance of case that allows the use of evidence found in accordance with the law. VI. Whether The Court enacted the so-called "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment, which holds that no state can "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." VII. Whether The Court enacted the Judges recuse themselves by "The Due Process clauses of the United States Constitution" and "judges' bias taints a case", "has a financial interest in the case's outcome". VIII. Whether twice now in the context of Federal anti-discrimination laws, this court has instructed that the rule of but-for causation is the "default rule []" against which Congress is presumed to legislate.