Prom
A significant legal ruling in 2020 established a precedent in favor of protecting the rights of transgender workers.
The Supreme Court has issued just one significant ruling concerning 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 a person’s employment simply because they are gay or transgender. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the four liberal members of the court 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 agreed with the ruling. He mentioned that he had read the decision and while some people may have been surprised, he respected and accepted the ruling. Trump also described the decision as very impactful.
The justices were tasked with interpreting a law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that prohibits discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, religion, national origin, and sex. Specifically, they had to determine if this law also protected gay and transgender employees from discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Justice Gorsuch stated that it was indeed so.
He stated that an employer who terminates an employee for being homosexual or transgender is essentially discriminating against them for characteristics or behaviors that would not be an issue if they were a different gender.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. expressed disagreement by stating that the argument’s confidence is astounding. He also mentioned that there is no proof that any member of Congress understood the text in that way when the law was passed in 1964.
The law that was discussed prohibited discrimination in the workplace based on gender. The case being debated focuses on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, which is broadly written and is used to create a framework for analysis rather than specific rules. Justice Alito mentioned in 2020 that the court’s ruling in this case could have an impact on future constitutional cases.
Adam Liptak reports on the activities of the Supreme Court and authors Sidebar, a column that discusses legal changes. He graduated from 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 Pages
Navigation for Site Information