 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Anti-discrimination law" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(March 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Anti-discrimination law ornon-discrimination law refers to legislation designed to prevent discrimination against particular groups of people; these groups are often referred to asprotected groups or protected classes.[1] Anti-discrimination laws vary by jurisdiction with regard to the types of discrimination that are prohibited, and also the groups that are protected by that legislation.[2][3] Commonly, these types of legislation are designed to prevent discrimination in employment, housing, education, and other areas of social life, such aspublic accommodations. Anti-discrimination law may include protections for groups based onsex, age,race,ethnicity,nationality,disability, mentalillness orability,sexual orientation,gender,gender identity/expression,sex characteristics,religion,creed, or individualpolitical opinions.
Anti-discrimination laws are rooted in principles of equality, specifically, that individuals should not be treated differently due to the characteristics outlined above.[4][5] At the same time, they have often been criticised as violations of the inherentright of free association. Anti-discrimination laws are designed to protect against both individual discrimination (committed by individuals) and fromstructural discrimination (arising from policies or procedures that disadvantage certain groups).[6] Courts may take into account both discriminatory intent,disparate treatment anddisparate impact in determining whether a particular action or policy constitutes discrimination.[7]
Equality and freedom from discrimination are outlines as basic human rights by theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).[8] While the UDHR is not binding, nations make a commitment to uphold those rights through the ratification of international human rights treaties.[9] Specific treaties relevant to anti-discrimination law include theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, theInternational Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, theConvention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, and theInternational Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.[10] In addition, the United NationsSustainable Development Goal 10 andGoal 16 also advocates for international efforts towards eliminating discriminatory laws.[11]
TheRacial Discrimination Act 1975 was the first major anti-discrimination legislation passed in Australia, aimed at prohibiting discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or national origin.[12] Jurisdictions within Australia moved shortly after to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, through acts including the Equal Opportunity Act 1977 and theAnti-Discrimination Act 1977.[13][14] The Australian parliament expanded these protections with theSex Discrimination Act 1984 (SDA) to cover all Australians and provide protections based on sex, relationship status, and pregnancy. Additionally, the SDA has been expanded to include gender identity and intersex status as protected groups.[15] Discrimination based on disability status is also prohibited by theDisability Discrimination Act 1992.[16]
The first Belgian anti-discrimination law of 25 February 2003 was annulled by the Belgian Constitutional Court. The Court ruled that the law was discriminative since its scope did not include discrimination on the basis of a political opinion or language and thus violated the articles 10-11 of the Belgian Constitution, instituting the principle of equality before law.[17]
A new law came into force on the 9th of June 2007.[18] This law prohibits any use of direct or indirect discrimination on the basis of age, sexual preference, marital status, birth, wealth, religion or belief, political or syndical opinion, language, current or future state of health, disability, physical or genetical property or social origin.[19]
The Philippines has a long history of establishing laws to protect individuals from discrimination and ensure equality before the law.[20] TheLabor Code of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No. 442, 1974) enforces equality in the workplace, prohibiting discrimination based on sex, race, or creed (Article 3).[21] Gender-based wage discrimination is also prohibited (Article 133), ensuring men and women receive equal pay for work of equal value. The1987 Philippine Constitution provides the foundational framework, guaranteeing that all persons shall have the right to equal protection of the laws (Article III, Section 1).[22] Subsequent legislation has addressed discrimination on the basis of gender, age, disability, mental health, social status, and sexual orientation.
One of the earliest comprehensive anti-discrimination laws was the Magna Carta for Persons with Disability (Republic Act No. 7277), enacted in 1992.[23] This law safeguards persons with disabilities from unfair treatment, particularly in employment, education, transportation, health, and access to public services. It mandates the removal of barriers and the provision of equal opportunities for full participation in society. The Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 (Republic Act 7877) considers it discriminatory when a sexual favor is required as a condition for hiring, continued employment, promotion, or receiving benefits (Section 3).[24] Employees who refuse such demands cannot be unfairly treated, deprived of opportunities, or subjected to adverse employment actions. In 2000, the Solo Parents' Welfare Act (Republic Act 8972) was enacted in 2000.[25] It safeguards solo parents from employment discrimination (Section 7).
TheMagna Carta of Women (Republic Act 9710), enacted in 2009, explicitly prohibitsdiscrimination against women in all forms (Section 2).[26] It provides women with equal access to education, employment, political participation, healthcare, and social services. In 2016, the Anti-Age Discrimination in Employment Act (Republic Act 10911) was enacted to protect workers from workplace prejudice based on age.[27] It prohibits employers from imposing age-based hiring restrictions or terminating employees solely due to age (Section 5). TheMental Health Act (Republic Act 11036), enacted in 2018, protects individuals with mental health conditions from stigma and discrimination (Section 2).[28] It guarantees access to mental health services and encourages the full social and occupational participation of affected persons. TheSafe Spaces Act (Republic Act 11313), enacted in 2019, protects individuals from gender-based harassment in workplaces, educational institutions, public spaces, and online.[29] It prohibits discrimination, harassment, and offensive remarks based on sex, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity, including sexist and homophobic remarks.[30] Based on the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act 11313, sexist remarks or slurs are statements that reflect prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination based on sex, typically targeting women.[31]
TheSOGIESC (Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, Gender Expression, and Sex Characteristics) Equality Act, also known as SOGIE Equality Bill, is a pending legislation designed to explicitly prohibit discrimination againstLGBTQIA+ persons. The proposed law aims to prevent marginalization, harassment, and unequal treatment in employment, education, health services, and public accommodations. Its passage would strengthen legal protections for sexual and gender minorities, aligning national law with the constitutional guarantee of equality. The first version of SOGIE Equality Bill was filed in 2000, introduced byMiriam Defensor‑Santiago (Senate) andEtta Rosales (House) during the11thPhilippine Congress.[32] As of 2025, the SOGIE Equality Bill remains unpassed, with the last recorded major procedural move on March 19, 2024, when the House committees on Women and Gender Equality and Appropriations submittedCommittee Report No. 1035 recommending the bill as a substitute for multiple House bills.[33]
The European Union has passed several major anti-discrimination directives, theRacial Equality Directive and the Employment Equality Directive, and theEqual Treatment Directive. These directives set standards for all member countries of the European Union to meet; however each member state is responsible for creating specific legislation to achieve those goals.[34] TheCourt of Justice of the European Union interprets the European Union anti-discrimination law assubstantive equality withequality of outcome for subgroups.[35]
All EU member states are also member states to the European Convention on Human Rights. Thus, article 14 of the Convention applies, which concerns a prohibition on discrimination on the ground of sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.
Laws forbidding discrimination in housing, public facilities and employment were first introduced in the 1960s covering race and ethnicity under theRace Relations Act 1965 and theRace Relations Act 1968.
In the 1970s, anti-discrimination law was significantly expanded. TheEqual Pay Act 1970 allowed women to bring action against their employer if they could show that they were being paid less compared to a male colleague for equal work or work of the same value. TheSex Discrimination Act 1975 forbade both direct and indirect discrimination on the basis of sex, and theRace Relations Act 1976 expanded the scope of anti-discrimination law on the basis of race and ethnicity.[36]
In the 1990s, protections against discrimination on the basis of disability was added primarily through theDisability Discrimination Act 1995.[36]
In the 2000s, the scope of employment anti-discrimination laws were expanded to cover sexual orientation (with the passage of theEmployment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003), age (theEmployment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006), and religion/belief (Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003).
In 2010, existing anti-discrimination law was combined into a single Act of Parliament, theEquality Act 2010. The Equality Act contains provisions forbidding direct, indirect, perceptive and associative discrimination on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, religion and belief, age, disability, sexual orientation and gender reassignment. Employment law also protects employees from worse treatment based on being part-time workers, agency workers or being on fixed-term contracts.[37]
In 1868 after theAmerican Civil War, theFourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, including theEqual Protection Clause. It was an effort byJohn Bingham and otherRadical Republicans to protect formerly-enslaved people from discrimination. Nevertheless, the promises of this and otherReconstruction Amendments went largely unfulfilled for nearly a century thanks to the profusion of racistJim Crow laws designed to oppresspersons of color and reinforceracial segregation in the United States. TheCivil Rights Act of 1964 was the next major development in anti-discrimination law in the US, though prior civil rights legislation (such as theCivil Rights Act of 1957) addressed some forms of discrimination, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was much broader, providing protections for race, colour, religion, sex, or national origin in the areas of voting, education, employment, and public accommodations.[38] This landmark legislation led the way for other federal legislation, which expanded upon the protected classes and forms of discrimination prohibited under federal legislation, such as theFair Housing Act[39] or theAmericans with Disabilities Act.[40] These protections have also been expanded through the courts interpretation of these pieces of legislation. For example, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Seventh and Second Circuits, and later the U.S. Supreme Court inBostock v. Clayton County, ruled thatemployment discrimination based on sexual orientation is a violation ofTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act.[41][42][43] In addition to federal legislation, there are numerous state and local laws that address discrimination that is not covered by these laws.[44]
Employment rates for all disabled men and disabled women under 40 have decreased since the implementation of the ADA.[45][46] This effect is especially pronounced for those with mental disabilities and for those with lower levels of education.[47] However, there is evidence to suggest that the decrease in employment rates is partially explained by increased participation in educational opportunities.[48] These decreases can be attributed to increased costs for employers to remain in compliance with ADA provisions; rather than bearing increased costs, companies hire fewer workers with disabilities.[49] While popular conception is that the ADA has created the opportunity for legal recourse for those with disabilities, less than 10% of ADA related cases find in favor of the plaintiff.[50]
David Neumark andWendy Stock found evidence that sex discrimination/equal pay laws boosted the relative earnings of black and white females and conversely reduced the relative employment of both black women and white women.[51]
Where anti-discrimination legislation is in force, exceptions are sometimes included in the laws.
TheInternational Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination has an exception which allowsdiscrimination based on nationality, citizenship or naturalization.[52]
In many nations with anti-discrimination legislation, women are excluded from holding certain positions in the military, such as serving in a frontline combat capacity or aboard submarines. The reason given varies; for example, the BritishRoyal Navy cite the reason for not allowing women to serve aboard submarines as medical and related to the safety of an unborn foetus, rather than that of combat effectiveness.[53][54]
Some religious organizations are exempted from legislation. For example, in Britain theChurch of England, in common with other religious institutions, has historically not allowed women to hold senior positions (bishoprics) despite sexdiscrimination in employment generally being illegal; the prohibition was confirmed by a vote by the Churchsynod in 2012.[55]
Selection of teachers and pupils in schools for general education but with a religious affiliation is often permitted by law to be restricted to those of the same religious affiliation even wherereligious discrimination is forbidden.
