Gorsuch wrote for the majority in the 6-to-3 ruling. That opinion and two dissents, spanning pages, touched on a host of flash points in the culture wars involving the L. The decision, the first major case on transgender rights, came amid widespread demonstrations, some protesting violence aimed at transgender people of color. The vastly consequential decision thus extended workplace protections to millions of people across the nation, continuing a series of Supreme Court victories for gay rights even after President Trump transformed the court with his two appointments.
Supreme Court bans LGBT employment discrimination
(mh=0m-QS2jps0O5W9JV)4.jpg)
(mh=_ISbrJFOekiAtd6H)10.jpg)
(mh=0eeUqO73teSX6RIC)14.jpg)
Supreme Court Delivers Major Victory To LGBTQ Employees : NPR
The court decided by a vote that a key provision of the Civil Rights Act of known as Title VII that bars job discrimination because of sex, among other reasons, encompasses bias against LGBT workers. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court. Even as understood today, the concept of discrimination because of 'sex' is different from discrimination because of 'sexual orientation' or 'gender identity,'" Alito wrote in a dissent that was joined by Thomas. The outcome is expected to have a big impact for the estimated 8. An estimated
Commemorating the SCOTUS gay marriage decision 5 years later
In a sweeping landmark decision , the U. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is prohibited under federal civil rights law. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids," wrote Justice Neil Gorsuch, a conservative appointed by President Donald Trump, in the majority opinion.
Obergefell v. Hodges , U. The 5—4 ruling requires all fifty states , the District of Columbia , and the Insular Areas to perform and recognize the marriages of same-sex couples on the same terms and conditions as the marriages of opposite-sex couples, with all the accompanying rights and responsibilities. Between January and February , plaintiffs in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee filed federal district court cases that culminated in Obergefell v.
