Whether the Fifth Circuit may disregard the doctrine of continuing violations and instead adopt a discrete-act factor test requiring subjective intent in a constructive-termination case in conflict with this Court's and other Circuits' objective negligence-based test, thereby effectively abolishing the negligence theory of liability for constructive termination

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Title VII, the Equal Pay Act (EPA) and the Equal Protection Clause, inter alia, prohibit 1) disparate treatment/wages based on gender and/or race; 2) hostile work environments that coerce employees to resign; and 8) retaliation for discrimination complaints. The Equal Pay Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 create individual liability for retaliatory harassment that forces an employee to resign. Employers are liable for constructive termination pursuant to Title VII and the Equal Pay Act. Petitioner Deana Pollard Sacks was a tenured professor at the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University (TSU) until 2020. She filed two lawsuits against TSU, Sacks-Iin 2018 and Sacks-II in 2022. This petition concerns Sacks-I/ for constructive termination. The petition for certiorari for Sacks-I is due March 14, 2024. In both lawsuits Sacks alleged violations of Title VII for sex discrimination, a hostile work environment, disparate treatment, and retaliation, inter alia. The claims were dismissed in both cases at the pleading stage for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Both dismissals were affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit’s opinions conflict in multiple ways with decisions of this Court and most or all other Circuits and pose the following issues: 1. Whether the Fifth Circuit may disregard the doctrine of continuing violations and instead adopt a discrete-act factor test requiring subjective intent in a case in conflict with this Court’s and other Circuits’ objective ii negligence-based test, thereby effectively abolishing the negligence theory of liability for constructive termination. 2. Whether the Fifth Circuit may adopt a restrictive causation requirement for Equal Pay Act retaliation claims in direct conflict with the language of 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3), Supreme Court precedent, and other Circuits. 3. Whether This Court Overruled Swierkiewicz and changed the pleading standard for Title VII cases by its decisions in Twombly And Iqbal, and if so, whether Iqbal empowers trial courts to disregard factual allegations and/or make factual findings to determine “plausibility.”