Contents:
- OPN ANALYSIS: FERAL EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMATN LAW PROTECTS GAY AND TRANSGENR EMPLOYE (UPDATED)
- NO CHALLENGE TO GAY RIGHTS STANDARD
- GAY RIGHTS VICTORY TO VANISH
OPN ANALYSIS: FERAL EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMATN LAW PROTECTS GAY AND TRANSGENR EMPLOYE (UPDATED)
Today the Supreme Court, by a vote of 6-3, led that even if Congrs may not have had discrimatn based on sexual orientatn or transgenr stat md when enacted the landmark law over a half century ago, Tle VII’s ban on discrimatn protects gay, lbian and transgenr employe. Donald Zarda, a skydivg stctor, and Gerald Bostock, a child-welfare-servic ordator for Clayton County, Geia, filed lawsus feral urt allegg that they were fired bee they were gay, which vlated Tle VII.
NO CHALLENGE TO GAY RIGHTS STANDARD
Gorsuch amed the qutn before the urt as a straightforward one: “Today, ” he wrote, “we mt ci whether an employer n fire someone simply for beg homosexual or transgenr. ” When an employer fir an employee “for beg homosexual or transgenr, ” that employer “fir that person for tras or actns would not have qutned members of a different sex.
GAY RIGHTS VICTORY TO VANISH
We don’t know why those bills didn’t pass, Gorsuch explaed, but one reason might have been that Congrs believed that gay, lbian and transgenr employe were already vered by Tle VII. Instead, he strsed, the urt is lg only that an “employer who fir an dividual merely for beg gay or transgenr fi the law.
” He also observed that the Supreme Court “has prevly stated, and I fully agree, that gay and lbian Amerins ‘nnot be treated as social outsts or as ferr digny and worth.