Supreme Court Rules that Title VII Protects Gay Rights

Kristina Buchthal Alkass • June 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

Should Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce lawyer up? What would their prenup look like?
By Joseph A. Olszowka and Kristina Buchthal Alkass September 12, 2025
Taylor Swift’s engagement to Travis Kelce has made a big splash in the news. In this podcast, Lavelle Law family law attorneys Joe Olszowka and Kristina Buchthal Alkass discuss the importance of prenuptial agreements - and not just for the wealthy.
Who qualifies for the
By Timothy M. Hughes September 10, 2025
The U.S. Treasury Department issued a preliminary list of nearly 70 jobs that qualify for “no tax on tips.” The occupations include a wide range of services spanning from Rickshaw drivers to digital content creators.
Does the Expiration of the Statute of Limitations for a Mortgage Extinguish the Mortgage Lien?
By Steven A. Migala September 4, 2025
On August 20, 2025, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court decided Chicago Title Land Trust Co. v. Watkin, 2025 IL App (1st) 241354 (August 20, 2025). At issue in Watkin was whether the expiration of the statute of limitations barring enforcement of a mortgage also extinguishes the mortgage lien.
New Illinois Small Estate Affidavit Law: Key Updates for 2025
By Nataly Kaiser August 26, 2025
The Illinois General Assembly has updated the Probate Act of 1975 to improve the small estate affidavit process for settling estates without formal probate. Effective immediately, this amendment offers significant benefits for Illinois residents managing a loved one's estate.
Illinois family laws help determine who gets to keep the pet when couples divorce.
By Joseph A. Olszowka August 25, 2025
A common consideration in a divorce case is who will get to keep the family pet. Illinois has a specific law that addresses this issue. In this video, divorce attorney Joe Olszowka explains the various factors the court considers when there is a pet involved in an Illinois family law case.
Lavelle Saves Homeowner from Real Estate Tax Bill Disaster
By Litigation August 20, 2025
Lavelle Saves Homeowner from Real Estate Tax Bill Disaster - In the end, our client clawed back ownership of his family’s home and was made whole on the attorney fees he was forced to pay to rectify this unfortunate situation.
A summary of NADA’s statement defending state franchise laws.
By Sarah J. Reusché August 14, 2025
Recently, OEMs like Tesla and Rivian implemented a direct-to-consumer approach that many state motor vehicle dealer laws are intended to prohibit. On May 27, 2025, the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) submitted a Public Comment, defending state franchise laws.
Free Family Law Seminar in Schaumburg, IL
By Family Law August 11, 2025
Join Lavelle Law for an informative presentation tailored to individuals seeking expert guidance on critical family law matters. Our experienced family law attorneys will break down three key areas — prenuptial/postnuptial agreements, collaborative divorce, and child custody.
IRS outlined key points for tax year 2025 relating to the OBBBA provisions.
By Timothy M. Hughes August 10, 2025
On August 7, 2025, the IRS announced that, as part of its phased implementation of the July 4th One Big Beautiful Bill Act, there will be no changes to certain information returns or withholding tables for tax year 2025 related to the new law. The IRS outlined key relevant changes to tax filers effective for '25 - '28.
Saved or client $1 Million in Estate Tax
By Estate Administration July 30, 2025
Due to Lavelle’s extensive knowledge in estate and gift tax, we were able to generate a combined federal and Illinois estate tax savings of $1 million for the client.
More Posts