From Pink News:
A federal judge has ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects
people from discrimination based on sexual orientation, in a landmark
verdict.
Civil Rights Act provision Title VII, passed more than 50 years ago,
prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis
of sex, race, color, national origin, and religion, but does not
explicitly include protections for LGBT people.
However, in a landmark ruling this week, a federal judge in
Pittsburgh agreed with the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC) in affirming that the protected characteristic of sex logically
includes sexual orientation.
In her ruling, Judge Cathy Bissoon wrote: “There is no more obvious
form of sex stereotyping than making a determination that a person
should conform to heterosexuality.”
“As the EEOC states, ‘discriminating against a person because of
the sex of that person’s romantic partner necessarily involves
stereotypes about ‘proper’ roles in sexual relationships – that men are
and should only be sexually attracted to women, not men’.
“That someone can be subjected to a barrage of insults, humiliation,
hostility and/or changes to the terms and conditions of their
employment, based upon nothing more than the aggressor’s view of what it
means to be a man or a woman, is exactly the evil Title VII was
designed to eradicate.”
The case, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Scott Medical
Health Center, had come about after a gay employee at the center, Dale
Baxley, alleged he was subjected to harassment because of his sexual
orientation.
Baxley contends he was referred to by his supervisor as a “fag,” “faggot,” “fucking faggot” and “queer”.
Scott Medical Health Center had argued that the lawsuit had no
grounds because there is no law outlawing discrimination based on sexual
orientation.
Human Rights Campaign Legal Director Sarah Warbelow said: “This is an
important win for LGBT equality.
“Judge Bissoon’s decision affirms that discrimination against an
individual based on their sexual orientation is fundamentally a form of
discrimination based on sex – which is prohibited by federal law.
“We congratulate the EEOC and the plaintiff on this victory.”
The Title VII issue has been tipped to eventually end up before the
Supreme Court, as the interpretation of the law is likely to cause a
circuit split.
1 comment:
Wow! This issue has been around for a decade at least with courts splitting hairs on what Title VII's 'because of sex' means. Finally some clear thinking that recognizes the intent of the nondiscrimination heart of Title VII.
Post a Comment