Prom
A significant legal ruling in 2020 set a precedent in favor of protecting the rights of transgender workers.
The Supreme Court has made just one significant ruling regarding the rights of transgender individuals, which is the case of Bostock v. Clayton County.
The 2020 ruling affirmed that a significant civil rights law safeguards gay and transgender employees from discrimination in the workplace.
Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who was appointed to the court by President Donald J. Trump, stated in a 6-3 ruling that it is illegal for an employer to fire someone for being gay or transgender. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and four liberal justices also supported this decision.
The total length of the majority opinion and two dissents was 168 pages. President Donald J. Trump told reporters that he acknowledged the ruling and had read the decision. He mentioned that some people were caught off guard by the ruling, but emphasized that they have made their decision and it must be respected. Trump also described the ruling as a strong and impactful decision.
The justices had to interpret a law called Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in employment based on race, religion, national origin, and sex. They had to determine if this prohibition extended to protecting gay and transgender employees from discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Justice Gorsuch stated that it was indeed the case
The author stated that when an employer fires someone for being homosexual or transgender, they are essentially firing them for characteristics or behaviors that would not be an issue if they were of a different gender.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. expressed disagreement with the argument, stating that he found it to be extremely arrogant. He also pointed out that there is no evidence to suggest that any member of Congress interpreted the statutory text in that way when the law was passed in 1964.
The law mentioned banned discrimination in the workplace based on gender. The discussion in court on Wednesday, however, focuses on the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, which is broadly written and provides a framework for analysis rather than strict rules. Despite this, Justice Alito noted in 2020 that the court’s decision in this case could have an influence on constitutional cases.
Adam Liptak is a journalist who focuses on reporting about the Supreme Court and writes a column called Sidebar that discusses legal news. He attended Yale Law School and worked as a lawyer for 14 years before starting his career at The New York Times in 2002. Learn more about Adam Liptak.
Prom
Website Index
Navigation for Site Information