The case stems from a lawsuit by in teacher Kimberly Hively alleging that the Ivy Tech Community College in South Bend didn't hire her full time because she is a lesbian. More people who have suffered employment discrimination in other parts of the country can use this decision as precedent: "If I can prove they did it because I'm gay, that's sex discrimination, and it violates federal law". The Seventh Circuit Court sided with her, reversing previous decisions on the topic.
It wasn't immediately clear how Tuesday's ruling would affect transgender employees in Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. A three-judge panel had previously ruled against Hively, but when a court sits en banc, it can reverse its prior rulings.
The majority of the en banc Seventh Circuit Court spoke through three separate opinions, but the result was explicit and clear: a gay or lesbian worker has a legal right to pursue a claim that he or she was not hired, was not promoted, or was sacked or otherwise was treated unequally because they were gay or lesbian.
The Seventh Circuit ruling now suggests they may not even need it. "Now I will have my day in court, thanks to this decision".
"Mostly in housing and public accommodation, which is retail and any time you're not at home or work is public accommodation".
President Lyndon B Johnson signing the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
China urges peace as Japan's fleet supports Trump's 'armada'
Even as the USS Carl Vinson steams towards the Korean Peninsula, Trump took to Twitter to warn North Korea. Very powerful - far more powerful than the air craft carrier, that I can tell you.
What activists want to do is expand the existing civil rights protections to also protect LGBTQ people.
Chief Judge Diane Wood wrote on behalf of the majority that "it is actually impossible to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation without discriminating on the basis of sex". "Simply put, sexual orientation discrimination doesn't classify people by sex; it doesn't draw male/female distinctions but instead targets homosexual men and women for harsher treatment than heterosexual men and women". The Eleventh Circuit Court decided the Civil Rights Act does not protect LGBTQ workers. She did this by analyzing the following scenario: A man could be in a relationship with a woman without fear of reprimand.
For the first time in history, the Civil Rights Act is being interpreted to protect LGBT employees - leading to the potential to wield the newly interpreted law against Christian employers who object to homosexuality.
What matters is what the law actually says, and what the legislature meant to do with that law. Nevins is optimistic that if these courts reconsider their cases en banc, as Lambda Legal has requested in Georgia, they may change their mind. "This is literal sex discrimination". He conceded the law is imprecise, but added: "That makes it an issue for Congress". But the 7th Circuit found the word "sex" can just as well mean "sexual orientation". It's now up to other federal courts, particularly the US Supreme Court, to affirm or reject the decision. That's frequently left the deciding vote to moderate Justice Anthony Kennedy, including when he cast the decisive vote in a 2015 ruling that gave same-sex couples the right under federal law to marry.
The dissent alludes to the judicial philosophy of Trump's high-court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, who advocates sticking with the original legislative texts in deciding legal disputes.
Comments