In a landmark cisn issued yterday, the Supreme Court of the Un Stat led that Tle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibs workplace discrimatn agast gay,...
Contents:
- SUPREME COURT RUL THAT GAY AND TRANSGENR EMPLOYE ARE A PROTECTED CLASS UNR TLE VII
- GAYS AND LBIANS ARE NOT A PROTECTED CLASS … OR ARE THEY?
SUPREME COURT RUL THAT GAY AND TRANSGENR EMPLOYE ARE A PROTECTED CLASS UNR TLE VII
* gay protected class *
In a landmark cisn issued yterday, the Supreme Court of the Un Stat led that Tle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibs workplace discrimatn agast gay, lbian, and transgenr people. The se volved nsolidated lawsus filed by two gay persons fired due to their sexual orientatn and a transgenr woman fired after revealg plans to transn om male to female. The employers and the Tmp admistratn argued that Congrs did not tend for Tle VII to protect LGBTQ persons and the term "sex" did not ver gay and transgenr stat.
In a 6-3 opn thored by Jtice Neil Gorsuch and joed by Chief Jtice John Roberts, the majory held that an "employer who fir an dividual for beg homosexual or transgenr fir that person for tras or actns would not have qutned members of a different sex. " The Court also clarified that an employer who tentnally fir a homosexual or transgenr employee, even part, bee of this sex-based stat "vlat the law even if the employer is willg to subject all male and female homosexual or transgenr employe to the same le. This lg signifintly alters the landspe of Tle VII sex-based discrimatn claims and is the most signifint lg on gay rights sce the Supreme Court regnized a nstutnal right for gay upl to marry 2015.
GAYS AND LBIANS ARE NOT A PROTECTED CLASS … OR ARE THEY?
Feral civil rights law protects gay, lbian and transgenr workers, the Supreme Court led Monday. * gay protected class *
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court led that an employer who termat an employee bee that employee is gay or transgenr vlat Tle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Wrg for the majory, Tmp appotee Jtice Gorsuch stated: “An employer who fir an dividual for beg homosexual or transgenr fir that person for tras or actns would not have qutned members of a different sex. Gorsuch stated his opn that “ is impossible to discrimate agast a person for beg homosexual or transgenr whout discrimatg agast that dividual based on sex.
Employers nnot discrimate agast gay or transgenr employe jt as they nnot discrimate based upon any other protected classifitns such as race, relign, or natnal orig. Employment discrimatn polici the past did not ver the rights of lbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenred (LGBT) workers, and this rulted several s of prejudice and discrimatn.
Doug Matanis has already broken down today’s landmark gay rights lgs some tail “Supreme Court Strik Down DOMA, Dismiss Prop. Genr harassment tak on a variety of forms, cludg discrimatg agast an applint on the basis of sexual orientatn, firg an employee for beg gay or transgenr, or engagg offensive and unwele nduct towards an employee based on sexual orientatn, genr inty or genr exprsn.