re: Justices rule LGBT people protected from job discrimination

quote:

---

is fired for being gay, they are fired for job performance or actions detrimental to the employer! But just like with minorities, they lose their job, they pull out the race card and want to file a law suit! If an employer was 'racist' then why would they have hired a gay person to begin with? Same thing with a minority- this is giving gay people superior rights- they will walk around an office with the attitude that they cannot be touched...this is just wrong...

---

Maybe I should remind you of this thread in OT from this past December

Do you hate gay people and transgenders

quote:

---

“An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court. “Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.”

---

That reasoning is a stretch and expansion of why the term sex was used in the law.

judicial branch needs to be reformed. Gorsuch's mentor would have written a fabulous dissent on this. Make congress update laws not judges, and politicians less concerned about appointing Judges to do it for them.

quote:

---

“The Court tries to convince readers that it is merely enforcing the terms of the statute, but that is preposterous,” Alito wrote in the dissent. “Even as understood today, the concept of discrimination because of ‘sex’ is different from discrimination because of ‘sexual orientation’ or ‘gender identity.’”

Kavanaugh wrote in a separate dissent that the court was rewriting the law to include gender identity and sexual orientation, a job that belongs to Congress. Still, Kavanaugh said the decision represents an “important victory achieved today by gay and lesbian Americans.”

---

Of course decision also will have multiple things fought for them to decide and time wasted instead of forcing congress to change laws.

quote:

---

But Monday’s decision is not likely to be the court’s last word on a host of issues revolving around LGBT rights, Gorsuch noted.
Lawsuits are pending over transgender athletes’ participation in school sporting events, and courts also are dealing with cases about sex-segregated bathrooms and locker rooms, a subject that the justices seemed concerned about during arguments in October.

Employers who have religious objections to employing LGBT people also might be able to raise those claims in a different case, Gorsuch said.

“But none of these other laws are before us; we have not had the benefit of adversarial testing about the meaning of their terms, and we do not prejudge any such question today,” he wrote.

---

quote:

---

An estimated 11.3 million LGBT people live in the U.S., according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA law school.

---

Williams Institute obviously doesn't watch tv or movies showing us the true numbers.

quote:

---

the problem is if you fire a gay person because of poor performance you will potentially have to prove that was the real reason in court.

---

If everything is documented and all your HR shite is proper it won't be an issue.

quote:

---

quote:
I actually don't think that you should be fired just for being gay.


Well I don't know anyone who does but I can see lots of lawsuits in the future for anyone who is fired that is gay.

---

It's an increase in expenses for sure even if orientation or trans not part of decision or even known to employer.

This is judges redefining a long excepted definition of a term that didn't including sexual feelings or fluidity, so unlike race or biological sex does law or the courts amendment of law fairly handle employer not knowing employees' sexual orientation or a decision to be a transgender or will they still have a legal or other added expense addressing these?

Based on when law enacted and along with physical traits and I9 documentation saying you didn't known person was a female or a male wasn't probably even considered as a defense. Will employee need to have declared sexual orientation or transgenderness beforehand? I am assuming laws written for these have something that handles this, but this law was not written for situations the term has been redefined to include.

Is decision retroactive to prior years employment actions?

quote:

---

Justices rule LGBT people protected from job discrimination

---

Horrible decision that will cost businesses billions and cause a rash of law suits

quote:

---

Agreed. I could see a business not wanting some big gross tranny working the front desk.

---

It’s okay to not be a dick

quote:

---

Were people being fired because of this?

---

Business owners started looking for ways to get rid of people when they were told they were going to change sexes. One of the cases was a funeral home.

quote:

---

The only non protected class left in America is straight white males.

---

If only we had a seat at the table...

quote:

---

Her name was Aimee Stephens. She passed away last month at the age of 59.

---

He passed away. Born a male and died a male.