Prom
A significant ruling in 2020 set a precedent by protecting the rights of transgender workers.
The highest court in the United States has made just one significant ruling regarding the rights of transgender individuals, which is the case of Bostock v. Clayton
The 2020 ruling stated that a significant civil rights law 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 four liberal justices also supported this decision.
The combined majority opinion and two dissents were a total of 168 pages in length. President Donald J. Trump stated to the press that he agreed with the ruling. He mentioned that he had read the decision and while some may have been surprised, the ruling has been made and they will abide by it. Trump also noted that he believed it was a strong decision.
The justices were tasked with interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in employment based on race, religion, national origin, and sex. They needed to determine if the protection against discrimination based on sex also extended to gay and transgender employees.
Justice Gorsuch stated that it was indeed the case
The author stated that if an employer dismisses someone for being gay or transgender, they are essentially firing them for characteristics or behaviors that they would not have a problem with in a person of a different gender.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. disagreed with the argument, stating that he found the argument to be incredibly arrogant. He also mentioned that there is no evidence to support the claim that any member of Congress interpreted the statutory text in that manner when the law was passed in 1964.
The law stated that it was illegal to discriminate in the workplace based on gender. The case being discussed now focuses on the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, which is more broadly worded and serves as a way to analyze cases rather than set strict rules. Even though it is a different type of law, Justice Alito mentioned in 2020 that the court’s decision could have an impact on future constitutional cases.
Adam Liptak is a journalist who specializes in reporting on the Supreme Court and legal news in Sidebar, a column he writes. He attended Yale Law School and worked as a lawyer for 14 years before starting at The New York Times in 2002. Learn more about Adam Liptak.
Prom
Index of the Website
Navigation for Site Information