Wal-Mart is unveiling a plan to eventually double purchases from women-owned suppliers, and invest in the advancement of women at its various vendors and agencies. Not mentioned, as far as we can see: The over 1 million women who actually work in the stores.

As predicted, many of the women who were unable to sue Wal-Mart for gender discrimination as a class are preparing smaller-scale claims. Now they've been given more time to do so.

When Sandra Rawline, a branch manager at Capital Title of Texas, was told she had to dye her hair from its natural gray, the boss was extra helpful, even offering to dye Rawline's hair for her. Rawline refused, and the next week she was fired and replaced with a woman ten years younger.

Add about a thousand female Costco employees to the 1.5 million Wal-Mart women who are going to feel the impact of the Supreme Court's ruling on class action discrimination suits this week. Of course, the parties disagree on how much of a dealbreaker the Wal-Mart decision will be for the Costco case.

What would have been the largest discrimination case in history against the nation's largest private employer will not go forward as a class, thanks to the Supreme Court's decision yesterday. Here's what's next.

All nine Justices today agreed on a legal point about whether the women suing Wal-Mart count as a single class. It's where they disagreed, 5-4 along ideological lines, that matters — namely, whether you can have a discriminated class without a written policy of discrimination. Guess which side all three female…

Recently-released excerpts from New York mayor Michael Bloomberg's deposition in a gender discrimination lawsuit against his company confirm that he kind of acted like an asshole.

Three female ex-employees are suing Virginia Tech, claiming the university paid them less than men in comparable positions. One says her would-be boss explicitly told her she was worth less because she was a woman.

One legal scholar calls it "the most important case the Supreme Court will hear this year." That happens to be a gender discrimination case against Wal-Mart, which the Court will hear today. So what exactly makes this case so important?

After a Columbia Central High School sophomore sued the school's cheerleading coach, the board of ed, the principal and the director of schools, a judge issued a restraining order against the squad; for the moment, no new cheerleaders can be selected.

Oh, Kentucky, this is not your week. Or campaign season. The Republican nominee for a Congressional seat said in a debate that because he thinks his wife never faced gender discrimination, it doesn't exist.

In Afghanistan, families sometimes dress their daughters as boys to increase their freedom and social value. The stories of these children are both disturbing and inspiring.

More allegations have emerged from the sexual harassment lawsuit three women filed yesterday against Goldman Sachs, including company-sponsored strip club nights followed by unwanted groping, racially insensitive emails, unequal pay, and clerical assignments equally-ranking men weren't asked to perform.

According to three women, the "great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity," Goldman Sachs, is also not so great to its female employees. They're suing the firm for gender discrimination. What are the charges?

What do 1.5 million women have in common? They work or worked for Wal-Mart, and are currently eligible for a class action discrimination lawsuit that would be the biggest in history. Wal-Mart just asked the Supreme Court to prevent that.

Jimmy Fallon's former stage manager is accusing him of discrimination, saying Fallon fired him because he wanted a woman for the job instead.

"Elena Kagan might very well be the first female nominee to the Supreme Court who does not define her gender as salient to her public life," argues Naomi Schoenbaum in The New Republic. Is that true? And if so, why?