And folks wonder why Conservatives are getting more and more frustrated and angry... The Obama administration seems to be trying to create laws again...
CNN NC sues Federal Government
CNN NC sues Federal Government
"Title VII, among other things, outlaws discrimination in federally assisted programs and authorizes Lynch to file lawsuits to protect constitutional rights in public facilities. North Carolina attacks this foundation in its lawsuit, saying precedence is clear: "Transgender status is not a protected class under Title VII," and it cites a half-dozen cases that it says back its stance. Only Congress can change this, the lawsuit says."
"Former Attorney General Eric Holder disagrees, and said in a 2014 memorandum that transgender discrimination claims are covered under Title VII. The Equal Opportunity Employment Commission also interprets Title VII as forbidding discrimination against transgender people."
7 comments:
There is conflicting case law on this issue. There's also a long list of court decisions that favor the Obama Administration's view of Title VII.
Source please...
EEOC on Title VII and LGBT Discrimination
Thank you and this one looks closest. Though it look like it was not a Title XII based ruling.
"G.G. ex rel. Grimm v. Gloucester Cty. Sch. Bd., __ F.3d __, 2016 WL 1567467 (4th Cir. Apr. 19, 2016). The district court dismissed a Title IX sex discrimination claim brought by a transgender boy high school student who was denied access to the boys' restroom. Reversing and remanding the case for further proceedings, the Court of Appeals held: "At the heart of this appeal is whether Title IX requires schools to provide transgender students access to restrooms congruent with their gender identity," and the district court failed to give appropriate deference to the U.S. Department of Education's interpretation of how its own sex discrimination regulation should apply to transgender students. That interpretation was set forth in a January 15, 2015 letter from the Department's Office for Civil Rights, which advised: "When a school elects to separate or treat students differently on the basis of sex . . . a school generally must treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity."
There's that problem again. Are we talking "gender identity," which goes on in someone's head, or are we talking "biological sex" which goes on below the waist? If someone wants to go through sex reassignment surgery, they should not be discriminated against for using the facilities matching their new parts. If not, they should be using the facilities matching their existing parts, or some private accommodation where parts don't matter.
Seems logical though Laurie and Joel would disagree.
So, if one disagrees with simple logic, what else is there?
Post a Comment