Issue: does federal civil rights law protect LGBT workers?
The U.S. Supreme Court relisted for review a trio of cases that address whether employers can discriminate against LGBT workers without violating federal civil rights law.
The justices are now scheduled to consider whether to accept the cases at the court’s Jan. 11 conference.
Relisting a petition for certiorari at more than one conference has, in recent terms, been a sign that the court is more likely to grant review. The cases had been scheduled for discussion at its Jan. 4 conference.
The question in the cases is whether Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans sex discrimination in the workplace, prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. Two cases address sexual orientation and the third addresses gender identity.
If the court wants to hold oral argument before the term ends in June, it has to grant review by mid-January so it has enough time to complete briefing. It could grant review after January and schedule argument for the fall.
The cases are R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. EEOC, U.S., No. 18-107, relisted 1/7/19; Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, U.S., No. 17-1623, relisted 1/7/19; Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, U.S., No. 17-1618, relisted 1/7/19.
Source
So, NSG, what do you think? Do you think that the Supreme Court will choose to review the cases and rule on them with a decision? What do you think that decision would be? Do you believe that worker discrimination laws should be expanded to protect people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity?
Personally, I think that this is an issue that needs to be pressed upon. In the continual fight for equal rights, employer discrimination needs to be part of that equality. There are 26 states where you can be fired - or refused employment - for being LGBT. That number drops to 17 states for state government employees. This is an issue, because LGBT people deserve the same employment and workplace discrimination protections that all other Americans get to exercise.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 wrote:It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, or to classify or refer for employment any individual on the basis of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly states that employers cannot refuse employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It is long overdue for the language of Title VII to include sexual orientation and gender identity in the list of discrimination protections. An employer should not be able to refuse employment or terminate employment solely on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Now that I've answered whether I think the law should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity, I should now answer the other two questions I posed for you. Do I think that the Supreme Court will decide to hear these cases and make a ruling? Yes! I absolutely believe that the present Supreme Court will hear these cases and make a ruling. Now for the unfortunate reality of this: If you'd asked one year ago, while Kennedy was still on the court, then yes I believe the Supreme Court would have ruled in favor of expanding Title VII to include sexual orientation and gender identity. However, looking at the present makeup of the court, I firmly believe the outcome will be the opposite: that the Supreme Court will rule that Federal civil rights law does not protect LGBT workers.
So, what do you guys think?
