Whether four months of constant racist comments, including anti-black tropes, monkey-imagery, and direct references to white-nationalist symbols, some directed at, and others made in the presence of protected groups of employees (African Americans) are sufficient to constitute a hostile work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 21 (1998), this Court held that a workplace “permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult can be. sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment,” in violation of Title VII. Reporting such violations are protected activities under Title VII. 42 U.S.C. § 2000ff-6(f). The 4th Circuit, in Boyer-Liberto v. Fontainebleau Corp., 786 F.3d 264, 273 (4th Cir. 2015), held that “to demonstrate retaliation a plaintiff must show that she was terminated because she engaged in protected activity.” Courts have traditionally held that “secretive surveillance of an employee may constitute an adverse employment action sufficient to support a claim of retaliation.” Kazcmarek v. County of Lackawanna Transit System, 2017 WL 5499160 at 3 (M_D. Pa. 2017). I. Whether four months of constant racist comments, including anti-black , tropes, monkey-imagery, and direct references to white-nationalist symbols, some directed at, and others made in the presence of protected groups of employees (African Americans) are sufficient to constitute a hostile work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? J. Whether secretive surveillance of an employee’s home immediately after they engaged in a Title VII protected activity is an adverse retaliatory action that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and/or 42 : U.S.C. § 1981? ii