Supreme Court refuses LGBTQ workplace discrimination case

Mar 2012
55,568
37,055
New Hampshire
#1
The Supreme Court refused Monday to hear a case challenging whether sex discrimination protections in employment extend to sexual orientation.

The justices denied an appeal from a Georgia woman who claims she was harassed and forced from her job as a security officer at Georgia Regional Hospital. Jameka Evans argued the hospital violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act when it discriminated against her because of her sexual orientation and her nonconformity to gender norms of appearance and demeanor, according to her attorneys at Lambda Legal.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Evans’s claim and dismissed her lawsuit. The court said it could not rule, based on its past precedent, that discrimination based on sexual orientation is prohibited under Title VII. The 11th Circuit declined to hear the case with its full panel of judges. The Supreme Court on Monday gave no explanation as to why it decided not to take the case.

Lambda Legal criticized the high court's move, saying it leaves in place a split among lower circuit court decisions that will cause confusion across the country. “The vast majority of Americans believe that LGBT people should be treated equally in the workplace. The public is on the right side of history; it’s unfortunate that the Supreme Court has refused to join us today, but we will continue to invite them to do the right thing and end this hurtful balkanization of the right of LGBT people to be out at work.”

Supreme Court refuses to hear LGBT workplace discrimination case | TheHill
 

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
31,837
25,391
Kansas
#2
LGBTQ are not a federally protected class. It should be government policy that they be treated equally, but until Congress awards them such protection, the courts should not resolve this. There's a 14th Amendment argument to be made about things like marriage, adoption, in other words getting the state out of the way and allowing gay et al. people to do what they want to do with their own lives. It's quite another matter RE: forcing employers to behave in a certain way and that extra step concretely should entail new legislation if the support is there. We cannot reform the whole country via the courts. If we try the courts will lose all legitimacy.
 
Nov 2010
23,156
14,834
#3
I'm starting to think SCOTUS is bought and paid for by the 1% as well as all the politicians. Probably don't want rule on this like because their overlords need to dumb distraction to people while they rob them blind.

Just like there ruling on patents has destroyed the US patent system, which benefits the giant companies. Citizens United which give the rich the power to buy our politicians.
 
Last edited:
May 2012
67,444
13,246
By the wall
#4
I'm starting to think SCOTUS is bought and paid for by the 1% as well as all the politicians. Probably don't want rule on this like because their overlords need to dumb distraction to people while they rob them blind.

Just like there ruling on patents has destroyed the US patent system, which benefits the giant companies.
Wow, and they call me the conspiracy theorist here lol.