Prom
A significant ruling in 2020 has set a precedent for protecting the rights of transgender employees, according to Adam Liptak
The Supreme Court has made only one significant ruling on the rights of transgender individuals, which was in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County.
In 2020, a significant decision was made stating that a key civil rights law safeguards gay and transgender employees from discrimination in the workplace.
Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, appointed by President Trump, stated in a 6-3 ruling that it is illegal for an employer to fire someone just for being gay or transgender. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court’s liberal wing also supported this decision.
The combined majority opinion and two dissents totaled 168 pages. President Donald J. Trump told reporters that he agreed with the ruling, stating that he had read the decision and while some may have been surprised, the ruling had been made and it must be respected. He also mentioned that he found the decision to be particularly impactful.
The justices were tasked with determining the interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a law that prohibits discrimination in employment based on race, religion, national origin, and sex. Specifically, they needed to decide if the prohibition against discrimination based on sex also included protection for gay and transgender employees.
Justice Gorsuch stated that it was the case.
He stated that when an employer fires someone for being homosexual or transgender, they are essentially firing them for characteristics or behaviors that they would not have questioned if the individual belonged to a different gender.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. disagreed with the argument, stating that it was incredibly arrogant. He also pointed out that there was no evidence to suggest that any member of Congress interpreted the law in that way when it was passed in 1964.
The law that was discussed banned discrimination in the workplace based on someone’s gender. The case being argued is about the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, which is broad and provides a framework for analysis rather than strict rules. Justice Alito suggested that the court’s decision in this case could have an impact on future constitutional cases.
Adam Liptak writes about the Supreme Court and writes a column called Sidebar about legal news. He attended Yale Law School and worked as a lawyer for 14 years before starting at The Times in 2002. Learn more about Adam Liptak.
Prom
Index of the website
Navigation to information on the