Menu

Showing 6 posts in LGBTQ.

6th Circuit First Appellate Court to Declare Transgender or Transitioning Status Discrimination is Sex Discrimination Under Title VII

In a milestone decision, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals held discrimination based on an employee’s transgender or transitioning status violates Title VII. In addition, the court held as a matter of law that a religious employer “cannot rely on customers’ presumed biases to establish a substantial burden” under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Thus, the employer’s sincerely held religious beliefs did not free it from the proscriptions of Title VII. More ›

Second Circuit Declares Sexual Orientation Discrimination is Sex Discrimination under Title VII

Acknowledging the “changing legal landscape” surrounding Title VII protections against discrimination, the Second Circuit overturned prior precedent and held sexual orientation is discrimination because of sex. The Second Circuit, sitting en banc in Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., examined the issue “from the perspective of sex stereotyping,” and unequivocally concluded that “sexual orientation discrimination is predicated on assumptions about how persons of a certain sex can or should be,” which is “an impermissible basis for adverse employment actions.” In Zarda, a deceased skydiving instructor was allegedly fired for disclosing his sexual orientation to a client and not conforming to the “straight male macho stereotype.” More ›

Evans Vows to Take Sexual Orientation Discrimination Case to the U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court may soon answer the most significant question to arise under Title VII in recent years: is sexual orientation discrimination “sex discrimination” within the meaning of the statute? The case to watch: Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital. More ›

The Writing is on the Wall, Yet Seventh Circuit Holds Sexual Orientation Is Not a Protected Class Under Title VII

Earlier this week, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College that Title VII does not protect employees or offer redress for discrimination based on sexual orientation.  As a result, discrimination against an employee based solely on sexual orientation is not prohibited by federal law, while discrimination against an employee based on gender non-conformity claims is prohibited. More ›

New York District Court Holds Sexual Orientation not Protected by Title VII

Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") announced filing its first federal lawsuits against private-sector businesses, challenging sexual orientation discrimination as sex discrimination. Coincidentally, a week later, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc. that, although sexual orientation discrimination is "reprehensible," it does not violate Title VII. These cases demonstrate the legal community's struggle in defining and interpreting the law as currently written while, at the same time, attempting to ensure equal protections for gay and lesbian individuals. More ›

EEOC gets Aggressive, will Start Treating all Sex Orientation Claims as Title VII Discrimination

Once upon a time, there was a plaintiff. This plaintiff had been passed over for a promotion because she was gay, so she sued her employer. When she looked at federal law, however, she found that Title VII did not include “sexual orientation” on its list of protected classes. So this plaintiff came up with a clever idea: she claimed that she actually was discriminated against based on her gender (a class listed in Title VII), arguing that the action was taken against her because she did not conform to gender stereotypes.   More ›

Search
Subscribe via Email