Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LGBT
Related: About this forumDoes the law protect the LGBTQ community from discrimination? It should be an easy answer.
Opinions
Does the law protect the LGBTQ community from discrimination? It should be an easy answer.
By Jenny Yang
April 26 at 8:49 AM
Jenny Yang, commissioner of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from 2013 to 2018, is a senior fellow in the Center on Labor, Human Services, and Population at the Urban Institute.
The Supreme Court decided Monday to hear a trio of cases addressing a long-disputed and critically important question: whether discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity is prohibited under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This issue has profound implications for our understanding of the meaning of equality. Although this question has fractured the United States for decades, the answer should be easy.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act bans employment discrimination because of [an] individuals race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Sexual orientation and transgender status are not listed as specific protected categories. But no such language is required. The beauty of our nations civil rights laws is that they protect everyone including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people who faces discrimination based on sex.
Under Supreme Court precedent, the question should be whether an employer relied on sex-based considerations or took gender into account when taking the challenged employment action. In 1989, the Supreme Court established in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins that discriminating against an employee for not conforming to gender stereotypes in this case, not walking, talking or dressing more femininely is sex discrimination. The court concluded that Title VII means that gender must be irrelevant to employment decisions.
In 1998, a unanimous Supreme Court in Oncale v. Sundowner resolved a dispute among the lower courts, finding that Title VII prohibits the entire spectrum of sex-based discrimination even a man harassed by other men. Although Congress may not have contemplated this situation when it passed Title VII, Justice Antonin Scalia, in writing for the majority, called for common sense in evaluating claims in social context, recognizing that statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonably comparable evils.
....
Today, courts are increasingly recognizing that no statutory basis exists for excluding LGBTQ individuals from the rights provided to us all. The ability of millions of Americans to support their families and live with dignity should not need to wait for further congressional action. Congress has already spoken by prohibiting discrimination based on sex. And that is why this should not be a hard decision.
Does the law protect the LGBTQ community from discrimination? It should be an easy answer.
By Jenny Yang
April 26 at 8:49 AM
Jenny Yang, commissioner of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from 2013 to 2018, is a senior fellow in the Center on Labor, Human Services, and Population at the Urban Institute.
The Supreme Court decided Monday to hear a trio of cases addressing a long-disputed and critically important question: whether discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity is prohibited under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This issue has profound implications for our understanding of the meaning of equality. Although this question has fractured the United States for decades, the answer should be easy.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act bans employment discrimination because of [an] individuals race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Sexual orientation and transgender status are not listed as specific protected categories. But no such language is required. The beauty of our nations civil rights laws is that they protect everyone including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people who faces discrimination based on sex.
Under Supreme Court precedent, the question should be whether an employer relied on sex-based considerations or took gender into account when taking the challenged employment action. In 1989, the Supreme Court established in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins that discriminating against an employee for not conforming to gender stereotypes in this case, not walking, talking or dressing more femininely is sex discrimination. The court concluded that Title VII means that gender must be irrelevant to employment decisions.
In 1998, a unanimous Supreme Court in Oncale v. Sundowner resolved a dispute among the lower courts, finding that Title VII prohibits the entire spectrum of sex-based discrimination even a man harassed by other men. Although Congress may not have contemplated this situation when it passed Title VII, Justice Antonin Scalia, in writing for the majority, called for common sense in evaluating claims in social context, recognizing that statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonably comparable evils.
....
Today, courts are increasingly recognizing that no statutory basis exists for excluding LGBTQ individuals from the rights provided to us all. The ability of millions of Americans to support their families and live with dignity should not need to wait for further congressional action. Congress has already spoken by prohibiting discrimination based on sex. And that is why this should not be a hard decision.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 857 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Does the law protect the LGBTQ community from discrimination? It should be an easy answer. (Original Post)
mahatmakanejeeves
Apr 2019
OP
AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)1. the new SC majority can do anything they want now
so I wouldnt expect much from then, they dont care about precedent, they are purey ideologically driven. Our best hope is that Roberts moves to the center and preserves precedents.
Soxfan58
(3,479 posts)2. But didn't people say that Hillary and Deranged Donald
Were the same? Judges have the power and the GOP is stacking.
Karadeniz
(22,516 posts)3. If you're a citizen, you're a citizen. I always considered the lgbt cases to be civil rights cases,
Not freedom of religion or anything else. Civil rights is easy. Anyone can marry, have the right to work, adopt, and if you're in a business open to the public, you're open to the whole public. This isn't hard, unless you're trying to turn citizens into lesser citizens.