Jillian Ambrose

Counsel | She/Her/Hers

Overview

Jillian provides pragmatic advice and strategic support to employers navigating challenges big and small. Whether supporting clients in grappling with emerging issues like the evolving DEI landscape, investigating high-profile harassment allegations, or defending complex claims in federal court, Jillian brings a collaborate and practical approach to challenging situations.

Jillian is a trusted advisor to clients on all aspects of employment law, including compliance with state and federal anti-discrimination laws, leave issues, wage and hour law compliance, and accommodation requests. She creates and conducts engaging and impactful anti-harassment trainings and supports Human Resources and Employee Relations professionals in developing robust internal investigations practices. She brings a holistic approach to misconduct investigations, recognizing the importance of precision, as well as compassion, in addressing sensitive allegations and developing actionable recommendations. Jillian also guides clients through pay equity analyses and audits, and she counsels on the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in making employment decisions.  

Jillian has a proven track record, in state and federal courts, of winning dismissal of claims of race, sex, disability, and age discrimination; wrongful termination; and wage and hour violations. 

Prior to joining the firm, Jillian served as a law clerk to Judge Anthony Epstein and then to Judge Steven M. Wellner, both of the D.C. Superior Court. Before law school, Jillian was an analyst in the human capital practice of an international consulting firm, where she provided management consulting services to a portfolio of federal agency clients.

Jillian graduated from the University of Michigan Law School, where she was the administrative manager of the Michigan Journal of Gender and Law and the president of the Women Law Students Association. She holds a bachelor's degree in government from Smith College.

Career & Education

|
    • Smith College, B.A., cum laude, government, 2007
    • University of Michigan Law School, J.D., cum laude, 2013
    • Smith College, B.A., cum laude, government, 2007
    • University of Michigan Law School, J.D., cum laude, 2013
    • District of Columbia
    • Maryland
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
    • District of Columbia
    • Maryland
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Jillian's Insights

Client Alert | 12 min read | 03.04.24

Implications for Private Employers of the Supreme Court’s Harvard Decision Banning Race-Based Affirmative Action in College Admissions

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional (under the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, as to public institutions) and a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as applicable to private institutions accepting federal financial assistance) for colleges and universities to consider race as a factor in the admissions process. See Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., No. 20-1199, 2023 WL 4239254 (U.S. June 29, 2023) (“Harvard”), a summary of which can be found here. This decision upended decades of precedent and has caused employers in the private sector to ask how the decision will impact diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DE&I”) initiatives and employment decisions. This article addresses the impact of Harvard, eight months later....

|

Jillian's Insights

Client Alert | 12 min read | 03.04.24

Implications for Private Employers of the Supreme Court’s Harvard Decision Banning Race-Based Affirmative Action in College Admissions

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional (under the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, as to public institutions) and a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as applicable to private institutions accepting federal financial assistance) for colleges and universities to consider race as a factor in the admissions process. See Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., No. 20-1199, 2023 WL 4239254 (U.S. June 29, 2023) (“Harvard”), a summary of which can be found here. This decision upended decades of precedent and has caused employers in the private sector to ask how the decision will impact diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DE&I”) initiatives and employment decisions. This article addresses the impact of Harvard, eight months later....