ADVERTISEMENT

BREAKING: Federal Appeals Court Rules Civil Rights Act Protects LGBT Employees From Workplace Bias

NoleATL

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 11, 2007
34,037
36,147
113
http://www.joemygod.com/2017/04/04/...s-act-protects-lgbt-employees-workplace-bias/

HUGE. The Associated Press reports:

A federal appeals court in Chicago on Tuesday ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act also protects LGBT employees from workplace discrimination, the first time a federal appellate court has come to that conclusion. The decision by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals comes after it threw out a July finding by three of its own judges that the law doesn’t cover sexual-orientation bias and ordered a rare rehearing by the full court, a rare session known as an en banc hearing.

It also comes as President Donald Trump’s administration has begun setting its own policies on LGBT rights. Late in January, the White House declared Trump would enforce an Obama administration order barring companies that do federal work from workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual identity. But in February, it revoked guidance on transgender students’ use of public school bathrooms, deferring to states.

The Hively case stems from a lawsuit by Indiana teacher Kimberly Hively alleging that the Ivy Tech Community College in South Bend didn’t hire her full time because she is a lesbian. The entire court reheard oral arguments in November and directed the toughest questions at a lawyer for the college who argued only Congress could extend the protections. The aggressive questions suggested the court might be willing to expand the 53-year-old landmark law.
 
Huge indeed. I was about to post this news. This could be a great step forward in the battle for equality in America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkbirch
The EEOC has been enforcing it this way for years after winning similar victories for federal government employees.
 
The EEOC has been enforcing it this way for years after winning similar victories for federal government employees.
And, Trump backtracked on protecting contractors from discrimination in federal work. How Trump, Pence, and Sessions react to this is important before it advances through the court system.
Besides economic equality there are a lot of protections that gay folks don't enjoy. I'm for all Americans being equal.
 
This is common so don't feel like you weren't keeping up... there is a reason why we're still pushing on these fronts...

It seems like in all of the work for discrimination stuff that we do (at work) that these things are already being taken into account at least at a corporate level (maybe not in the legal arena and I am sure there are asshole employers that do discriminate and they will continue to but they won't now be able to do so openly in this area).
 
http://www.joemygod.com/2017/04/04/...s-act-protects-lgbt-employees-workplace-bias/

HUGE. The Associated Press reports:

A federal appeals court in Chicago on Tuesday ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act also protects LGBT employees from workplace discrimination, the first time a federal appellate court has come to that conclusion. The decision by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals comes after it threw out a July finding by three of its own judges that the law doesn’t cover sexual-orientation bias and ordered a rare rehearing by the full court, a rare session known as an en banc hearing.

It also comes as President Donald Trump’s administration has begun setting its own policies on LGBT rights. Late in January, the White House declared Trump would enforce an Obama administration order barring companies that do federal work from workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual identity. But in February, it revoked guidance on transgender students’ use of public school bathrooms, deferring to states.

The Hively case stems from a lawsuit by Indiana teacher Kimberly Hively alleging that the Ivy Tech Community College in South Bend didn’t hire her full time because she is a lesbian. The entire court reheard oral arguments in November and directed the toughest questions at a lawyer for the college who argued only Congress could extend the protections. The aggressive questions suggested the court might be willing to expand the 53-year-old landmark law.

Nobody should be discriminated in the workplace. I thought that was obvious. I also think it's obvious that nobody should be forced to use a restroom with someone of the opposite sex. Can't fathom how you could argue otherwise in both cases.
 
Heard about this in the local news. This woman BTW still has to actually prove discrimination in court, this ruling just gives her the go ahead to sue for discrimination.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT