William King Moss, III v. Sachem Central Board of Education, et al.

Whether a federal court may dismiss a discrimination complaint at the pleading stage by crediting only the plaintiffs alternative theory of unlawful consideration—framed in response to the defendant’s stated justification—while ignoring the plaintiffs primary theory of outright non-consideration based on race and unconstitutional conduct, contrary to Federal Rules and Civil Procedures §8 (“Rule 8”) and this Court’s precedent on alternative pleading. Rule 8(d)(3), Rule 8(e); Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007); Gelboim v. Bank of Am., 574 U.S. 405 (2015).

Whether courts adjudicating Title VII, §1981, and Fourteenth Amendment claims must incorporate protective state anti­ discrimination laws under 42 U.S.C. §1988 (“§1988”)—such as NYSHRL §§292(19), 296(l)(h) and 300—where federal law lacks analogous rules on comparators and exceptions/exemptions or boundaries of civil service hiring standards. Hardin v. Straub, 490 U.S. 536 (1989); Chardon v. Fumero Soto, 462 U.S. 650 (1983).

Whether a public-school district’s stated reason for rejecting a Black civil service applicant is constitutionally “legitimate” under the Equal Protection Clause and §1981 when its hiring process violated the NY Constitution’s mandate that civil service appointments be based, when practicable, on