Head-to-head
Thomas Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia vs. Brandon L. Fake, et al., Petitioners v. Pennsylvania, et al. vs. Sebastien Djessouho, Petitioner v. IHMS (Boston), LLC, dba Taj Boston
Civil Rights cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
The matchup
Docket 25-183Thomas Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of GeorgiaBefore argumentOctober Term 2025Docket 25-7450Brandon L. Fake, et al., Petitioners v. Pennsylvania, et al.Before argumentOctober Term 2025Docket 25-7539Sebastien Djessouho, Petitioner v. IHMS (Boston), LLC, dba Taj BostonBefore argumentOctober Term 2025
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Civil Rights
- Why compared
- Reviewed Civil Rights tags connect these current-term public cases.
Questions presented
- Thomas Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia
- Whether Title IX provides employees of federally funded educational institutions a private right of action to sue for sex discrimination in employment.
- Brandon L. Fake, et al., Petitioners v. Pennsylvania, et al.
- 1. Does a Federal Judge have authority to preside over a case when a clear and willful violation of 28 U.S. Code § 455 has been committed under a conflict of interest with Defendants? 2. Does absolute immunity apply when a judge has acted criminally under color of law and without jurisdiction, as well as actions taken in an administrative capacity to influence cases? 3. Does Eleventh Amendment immunity apply when officers of the court have violated 31 U.S. Code § 3729, 28 U.S. Code § 455, engaged in a kidnapping conspiracy and conspiracy against rights of the Plaintiffs? 4. When an officer of the court has committed fraud upon the court, what are the remedies available to the afflicted parties when the appellate courts have ruled in favor of a Federal judge who has colluded with defendants, essentially operating within the Federal Courts as a judicial protection racket in violation of 14 th Amendment Due Process rights? 5. Is Title IV-D, Section 458 of the Social Security Act a law that violates the United States Constitution due to the incentives it creates for the court to willfully violate civil rights of parties in child custody and child support cases? 6. Has the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit erred in basing its decision solely on the rulings of a Federal judge who has clearly and willfully violated 28 U.S. Code § 455 in utter disregard of facts established for the record?
- Sebastien Djessouho, Petitioner v. IHMS (Boston), LLC, dba Taj Boston
- 1. Whether the Superior Court erred, and whether the Appeals Court erred in affirming, by treating Petitioner's jury-trial waiver as knowing and voluntary where the record reflects Petitioner's assent to a bench trial was conditioned on the Eve appearance of a key witness (Laura Moye), and the trial court emphasized practical disadvantages of a jury trial to a self-represented, interpreter-assisted litigant before accepting the waiver. 2. Whether the Superior Court committed reversible error in resolving central credibility disputes against Petitioner where the defense's key witness repeatedly testified she did not recall key details of the alleged workplace incident, and where Petitioner contends the evidentiary presentation was incomplete due to the absence of key witnesses. 3. Whether the Superior Court and Appeals Court erred in concluding Petitioner failed to establish discrimination and retaliation under G.L. c. 15 IB where Petitioner contends the employer's stated reasons were pretextual, including alleged irregularities in the internal transfer process and shifting characterization of the Accounts Receivable Clerk position.
Go deeper
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.