Prom
A significant ruling in 2020 set a precedent in favor of protecting the rights of transgender workers. This decision was seen as
The Supreme Court has made only one significant ruling regarding the rights of transgender individuals, which is the case of Bostock v. Clayton County.
The decision made in 2020 stated that a significant civil rights law safeguards gay and transgender employees from discrimination in the workplace.
Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who was 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 four liberal justices on the court also supported this decision.
The decision was made up of a majority opinion and two dissents, totaling 168 pages. President Donald J. Trump told reporters that he accepted the ruling and acknowledged that some people were surprised by it. He stated that they had made their ruling and that it was a strong decision.
The justices had to interpret Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, religion, national origin, and sex. They needed to determine if this prohibition against discrimination based on sex also extended to gay and transgender workers.
Justice Gorsuch stated that it was the case.
The writer stated that an employer who terminates an employee for being homosexual or transgender is essentially firing them for characteristics or behaviors that would not have been an issue if they were a different gender.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. disagreed with the argument, stating that it is incredibly arrogant. He pointed out that there is no evidence to suggest that any member of Congress understood the statutory text in that way when the law was passed in 1964.
The law that was discussed made it illegal to discriminate in the workplace based on a person’s sex. The case being debated on Wednesday, however, focuses on the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, which is more broad and provides a framework for analysis instead of specific rules. Justice Alito mentioned in 2020 that the court’s ruling in this case could have a significant impact on future constitutional cases.
Adam Liptak writes about the Supreme Court and authors Sidebar, a column focused on legal news. After graduating from Yale Law School, he worked as a lawyer for 14 years before starting at The Times in 2002. Learn more about Adam Liptak.
Prom
Index of the website
Navigational information about the