Prom
The decision made in 2020 to protect the rights of transgender workers is considered a significant legal precedent. This decision sets an
The highest court in the United States has only made one significant ruling regarding the rights of transgender individuals, which is the case of Bostock v. Clayton
The decision made in 2020 stated that a significant civil rights legislation safeguards gay and transgender employees from discrimination in the workplace.
Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, appointed by President Donald J. Trump, stated in a 6-3 ruling that it is against the law for an employer to terminate an employee based solely on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court’s liberal wing also supported this decision.
The ruling, consisting of the majority opinion and two dissents, was spread across 168 pages. President Donald J. Trump told reporters that he acknowledged the ruling, stating that he had read it and although some were surprised, he accepted and respected the decision. He also noted that he found the decision to be very impactful.
The justices were tasked with interpreting a law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that prohibits discrimination in employment based on race, religion, national origin, and sex. They had to determine if this prohibition against discrimination based on sex also extended to gay and transgender employees.
Justice Gorsuch stated that it was indeed the case
According to him, when an employer dismisses someone for being homosexual or transgender, they are essentially firing them for characteristics or behaviors that they would not have had a problem with if the person belonged to a different gender.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. disagreed and expressed astonishment at the argument presented, stating that there is no evidence to suggest that any member of Congress viewed the statutory text in that manner when the law was passed in 1964.
The law banned discrimination in the workplace based on gender. The case being discussed focuses on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, which provides a framework for analysis instead of strict rules. Justice Alito suggested that the court’s decision in this case could have a strong influence on future constitutional cases.
Adam Liptak is a writer for The New York Times who focuses on reporting about the Supreme Court and legal news in his column, Sidebar. He studied at Yale Law School and worked as a lawyer for 14 years prior to joining The Times in 2002.
Prom
List of Pages
Navigation for Site Information