CHICAGO: 312 332 7555 SCHAUMBURG: 847 705 7555
Blog Post
Supreme Court Rules that Title VII Protects Gay Rights
Kristina Buchthal Alkass • Jun 29, 2020
The United States Supreme Court ruled that civil rights laws must protect gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals, in a landmark 6-3 ruling that paves the way for gay rights protections for workers in all 50 states.
The Supreme Court ruling decides three cases, ultimately finding that the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people with its language barring sex discrimination. Justice Neal Gorsuch, nominated by President Donald Trump, wrote the opinion for the typically conservative court.
The Supreme Court has issued several landmark opinions about gay rights in the last several years, including the Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the Court ruled in favor of gay marriage. The court’s opinions in those cases were written by Justice Anthony Kennedy. This is the first ruling by the Court on a gay rights issue since Justice Kennedy retired.
“The answer is clear,” Gorsuch wrote. “An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.”
Previously, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender plaintiffs have sued for violations of their rights under Title VII, claiming that discrimination based on sexuality is akin to sex discrimination. Federal appeals courts throughout the nation differed in their rulings on the topic. The Supreme Court’s decision now requires federal courts to apply the law to protect gay rights in every state.
The ruling focuses on three separate individuals who were each fired by separate employers, after being employed for many years. The employees said that they were fired shortly after their employers learned that they were gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.
Gerald Bostock worked as a child welfare advocate for Clayton County, Georgia. He was an exemplary employee. But when he became involved in a gay recreational softball team and was the subject of some disparaging comments in the Clayton County community, Bostock was terminated for “unbecoming” conduct. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Clayton County did not violate Bostock’s civil rights.
Donald Zarda worked as a skydiving instructor for Altitude Express in New York. He was fired days after his employer learned he is gay. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Zarda’s employer violated his civil rights.
Aimee Stephens was employed by R. G. & G. R. Harris Funeral Homes in Garden City, Michigan. After working for the company for six years, she informed her employer that she would no longer present herself as male, and rather present herself as female at work and home. She was terminated shortly thereafter, with her employer stating “this isn’t going to work out.” The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the funeral home violated Stephens’ civil rights.
“Ours is a society of written laws,” Gorsuch wrote. “Judges are not free to overlook plain statutory commands on the strength of nothing more than suppositions about intentions or guesswork about expectations. In Title VII, Congress adopted broad language making it illegal for an employer to rely on an employee’s sex when deciding to fire that employee. We do not hesitate to recognize today a necessary consequence of that legislative choice: An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender defies the law.”
The ruling is expected to have a wide-ranging impact in imparting more rights to gay, lesbian, and transgender employees.
If you have any questions about this article or gay rights in general, contact the author, attorney Kristina Buchthal Alkass, at kalkass@lavellelaw.com
or 847-705-7555.
More News & Resources
Lavelle Law News and Events
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), in a 3-2 vote, issued its final Non-Compete Clause Rule (“Rule”) which prohibits noncompete clauses in agreements between employees and their workers. This highly anticipated Rule follows a substantially similar proposed rule from the FTC released on January 19, 2023. The Rule will not become effective until 120 days after publication in the Federal Register, and covered employers will be required to comply with the Rule by that effective date, which could come as early as August of this year. By the FTC’s estimate, this ban could affect up to one in five American workers.
When determining how to distribute the marital assets between parties to a divorce, the division of an interest in a small or medium business owned by one or both of the parties is more complex and requires a careful examination of the value of the business or business interests. The Court must determine the value of the business interest in order to determine how to equitably divide all marital assets in which the parties have an interest. The Court will regularly rely on the valuation reports of the parties' experts regarding the value of the business. The business valuation expert will utilize a number of different methods in determining the value of a business. The professional appraiser will examine and assess the value of the business and provide expert testimony and reports to the parties and the Court.
Vehicle dealerships particularly have recently found themselves needing to navigate the complex terrain of adhering to the BIPA’s stringent requirements to avoid being targeted through lawsuits. There has been a recent noticeable uptick in class action lawsuits under the BIPA, serving as a critical wake-up call for the automotive retail industry, highlighting the need for dealerships to review and enhance their practices if they are using biometric technology.
Join us for this seminar as Lavelle Law attorneys Kelly Anderson and Chance Badertscher will unpack the complexities of Illinois commercial leases in order to prepare you for strong leasing relationships.
Between the state of Illinois and federal courts, there are well over 200 statutes that deal with fee shifting provisions. They lay out ways in which legal fees may become the responsibility of one party in a lawsuit. In this video, Lavelle Law Associates Jodie Upchurch and MaryAllison Mahacek discuss ways that these provisions should be included in contracts and how they can be used advantageously.
Lavelle Law real estate attorney, Chance Badertscher, recently participated in a Straight Up Chicago Investor Podcast and shared his expertise on what to expect on the final walkthrough before your real estate closing. He breaks it down and shares tips for both the buyer and the seller.
Between the state of Illinois and federal courts, there are well over 200 statutes which deal with fee shifting provisions. They lay out ways in which legal fees may become the responsibility of one party in a lawsuit. Lavelle Law Associates Jodie Upchurch and MaryAllison Mahacek discuss ways that these provisions should be included in contracts and how they can be used advantageously.
Our team worked very quickly (in a matter of just a few days) to establish temporary guardianship of the client, and – most importantly – successfully argued for the judge to authorize the guardian to execute and finalize the estate plan documents on the client’s behalf. Finalizing the estate planning documents in advance of the client’s death saved the estate and the client’s family nearly $500,000 in estate taxes.
Businesses classified as medical spas have a variety of special considerations that must be adhered to in the state of Illinois. In this video, Lavelle Law attorney Eso Akunne discusses critical issues that must be met to operate with state laws. If you are interested in getting involved in this rapidly growing industry be sure to watch this video.
The IRS recently announced that almost 940,000 people across the nation have unclaimed refunds for tax year 2020 but face a May 17 deadline to submit their tax returns. The IRS estimates more than $1 billion in refunds remain unclaimed because people have not filed their 2020 tax returns yet. The average median refund is $932 for 2020. The IRS estimates that about 36,200 Illinois taxpayers may lose $40,608,000 in potential refunds.
STAY UP TO DATE
Subscribe to our newsletter
OUR LOCATIONS
Phone: 312 332 7555
Fax: 312 332 4611
Fax: 847 705 9960
Created by Olive + Ash.
Managed by Olive Street Design. 