Supreme Court Says LGBTQ Employees Are Protected By Civil Rights Employment Statutes

haha goobers

The Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ employees from being discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

The court on Monday issued opinions on two major decisions with far-reaching implications for the civil rights of transgender and LGBTQ individuals.

It was a 6-3 ruling, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch joining the four liberal justices in the majority.


Writing for the majority, Gorsuch argued that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is fundamentally no different than discrimination based on sex.

“An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions,” Gorsuch wrote. “That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.”

“We agree that homosexuality and transgender status are distinct concepts from sex,” he added later. “But, as we’ve seen, discrimination based on homosexuality or transgender status necessarily entails discrimination based on sex; the first cannot happen without the second.”


The rulings rest on a pair of arguments the court heard in October in which justices considered whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal law that prohibits workplace discrimination, applies to LGBTQ and transgender workers.

Discrimination based on homosexuality or transgender status necessarily entails discrimination based on sex; the first cannot happen without the second.Justice Neil Gorsuch
While Title VII bars discrimination on the basis of “race, color, national origin, sex, and religion,” the original bill didn’t define “sex” as a term. The Trump administration used that ambiguity to argue that lawmakers’ original intent focused solely on protecting women’s rights and, therefore, shouldn’t be extended to include sexual orientation or gender identity.

“The issue is not whether Congress can or should prohibit employment discrimination because of sexual orientation,” Solicitor General Noel J. Francisco, who represented the Trump administration, argued. “The issue, rather, is whether it did so when it prohibited discrimination because of sex.”

Questions posed by members of the court’s conservative majority in October suggested they largely agreed and believed the remedy should be legislative, not judicial.

“If the court takes this up and interprets this 1964 statute to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation,” Justice Samuel Alito said, “we will be acting exactly like a legislature.”

Justice Alito returned to that theme in a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/scotus-lgbtq-transgender-decision_n_5ebefe48c5b6299362046713

 

But the truth is....

 

And when some guy comes into a public women's room to relieve himself, your wife can tell us how she felt about it.

Proper civil disobedience to this ridiculous decision would be for every man to go to the ER department of their company and declare themselves to be “gay.” This quota BS needs to end.

John Roberts in a Bush appointed nothing burger. The vote by Gorsuch was a major disappointment and shame on him.

 

This is the reality the Utopians choose to ignore. I always walk to the outside of a ladies room in public when my girl needs to go. No gender confused lumberjack will go into that bathroom while my girl is in there.

 

if he does his hair and makeup right you'll never even know will you? really this stuff keeps you up nights?

 

Not just a vote by Gorsuch, he authored the prevailing opinion.

Your first paragraph is wrong and transphobic. Allow me to correct it:

"And when some woman comes into a public women's room to relieve herself, your wife can tell us how she felt about it."

Or did I misinterpret and you were worried about a trans-man bio-female entering the women's restroom? My apologies if that was the case.

 

Would you be comfortable watching a gender confused man enter a public restroom that your new bride was occupying? I rather suspect that a brief moment of terror would flash through your mind.

 

I don’t have a problem with post operation transsexuals. I don’t have a problem with a male on the steroids who sits down.

I have a big problem with a guy in male clothing who says he is “a women” and goes into the women’s room. You leftists can call me a bigot, but I try to take the fair view. There are sick guys out there.

 

Bigot

 

Yes, I'm not scared because I don't equate transgender with criminal.

 

Neither do I. Those are your words. I am not trying to draw you into an argument so don’t level veiled accusations towards me please. You will lose the match.... I been around long enough to know that not all people have good intentions. A man entering a public facility that is occupied by a woman under the auspicious of being gender confused can be a dangerous situation.

 

A disgusting comment. This is why the country is so divided.

What would you say to “perverts?” That’s why you hear about gay people on conservative websites.

 

You said I could though...

 

How is it dangerous without insinuating criminal action?

 

Okay a real pervert can enjoy himself while your wife uses the restroom. They are out there.

 

My wife works with a man that does exactly this. He gets conveniently gender confused when ladies are in the facility.... I know I am old and don’t know anything. This rock I have been living under has robbed me of my cognitive abilities. Fortunately though it has left me with my common sense.

 

Better, but I personally feel like giving rights to a long marginalized population of people is worth the risk of hypothetical criminals.

Besides, don't the criminals already sneak in? If I'm understanding the gun control argument correctly, criminals will commit crimes regardless of laws.

 

Oh man, it's gonna rock your world when you hear about gender-fluidity

 

I have heard about them, the furries and whatever else people wish to identify with. Look, everybody has their own cross to bear these days. And that’s fine. But we all have to live on this same spinning rock. And I don’t care if you have nails in your face, gauges in your ears and have Lucifer tattooed on your forehead. I will go out of my way to be polite to you.... But you won’t enter the bathroom while my daughter is in there. It takes but a moment for a child to be abused and mentally damaged the rest of her life. My daughter will not be a statistic in the name of political correctness.

 

hide under the bed much?