Supreme Court extends federal civil rights protection in workplace to all LGBTQ employees

Supreme Court extends federal civil rights protection in workplace to all LGBTQ employees

By David G. Savage

Los Angeles Times

The Supreme Court declared Monday that the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ employees from workplace discrimination.

In a major victory for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender workers, the justices said the law’s ban on job discrimination on basis of “sex” can be read to forbid bias against employees because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, appointed by President Trump, spoke for a 6-3 majority.

“Today, we must decide whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender. The answer is clear. An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguishable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.”

“Those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result. Likely, they weren’t thinking about many of the act’s consequences that have become apparent over the years, including its prohibition against discrimination on the basis of motherhood or its ban on the sexual harassment of male employees. But the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands. When the express terms of a statute give us one answer and extratextual considerations suggest another, it’s no contest. Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit.”

The decision is a remarkable example of a conservative justice following the words of a liberal law _ in this instance, the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Gorsuch said it was not surely not intended to protect gay and lesbian employees, but its words prohibited employers from making hiring or firing decisions bases on sex, he said.

Bay Area News

Just Posted

Ahmad Ibrahim Moss, a Lyft driver whose pandemic-related unemployment benefits have stopped, is driving again and relying on public assistance to help make ends meet. <ins>(Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)</ins>
How much does gig work cost taxpayers?

Some drivers and labor experts say Prop. 22 pushed an undue burden on to everyday taxpayers.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who visited the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 6 headquarters on Recall Election Day, handily won after a summer of political high jinks.	<ins>(Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)</ins>
Lessons from a landslide: Key takeaways from California’s recall circus

‘After a summer of half-baked polls and overheated press coverage, the race wasn’t even close’

Suicide is the second leading cause of death for adolescents in the U.S. (Shutterstock)
Why California teens need mental illness education

SB 224 calls for in-school mental health instruction as depression and suicide rates rise

The Kimpton Buchanan Hotel in Japantown could become permanent supportive housing if The City can overcome neighborhood pushback. (Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)
Nimbytown: Will SF neighborhoods allow vacant hotels to house the homeless?

‘We have a crisis on our hands and we need as many options as possible’

Most Read