Supreme Court Hears Historic Transgender Civil Rights Case

The transgender flag flies on a building. (Flickr)

The Supreme Court heard arguments about whether or not the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlaws employment discrimination based on transgender status and sexual orientation on October 8.

If the court decides that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act applies to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender workers within the United States, this could guarantee protections towards the LGBTQ+ population which had not previously been extended to them. It would mark a signi9ficant shift in government policy regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation, a practice which continues to exist across the nation.

The first lawsuit concerns two gay men who claim that they were fired because of their sexual orientation, whereas the second lawsuit concerned a transgender woman, Aimee Stephens, who said that her employer fired her from work after she publicly declared that she was transgender.

The justices seem divided on ideological lines, except for Justice Neil Gorsuch whose questions suggested that the specific wording of the 1964 law did ban discrimination in areas including sexual orientation. Gorsuch’s argument was based on the actual text of the law, there can be no discrimination on “basis of sex,” and that included whether or not the employee was fired based on their attraction to someone of the same sex, per Vox. 

On the other hand, Justice Alito stated that Pamela S. Karlan, a lawyer for the first lawsuit involving workplace discrimination against two gay men, was “trying to change the meaning of what Congress understood sex to mean and what everybody understood,” reported the New York Times.

Karlan countered by asking the two men, “Would the same thing have happened if you were of a different sex?”  

Several members of the court, including Justice Alito and Chief Justice Roberts, worried about the larger societal implications of the case. Justice Roberts, in particular, was concerned about infringing on the religious rights of certain organizations. He also pointed out why the court, not Congress, should ban discrimination based on sexual orientation explicitly. 

The court also expressed concerns about the transgender bathroom issue but were frequently told by the lawyers representing the plaintiffs that banning workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation would have no effect on bathrooms.

For now, the Supreme Court remains divided on the issue as they continue to hear oral arguments.