Posted on 06/15/2020 7:22:54 AM PDT by Stravinsky
Washington — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that it is illegal for an employer to fire someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, delivering a major victory in the fight for civil rights for LGBT people.
The court's 6-3 ruling extends the scope of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin and religion, to include LGBT people. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch, who authored the majority's opinion, joined the liberal wing of the bench in ruling that "an employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
leftists on the court never cross over, always vote in tandem. The “right” always crosses over.
The Left’s strategy of keeping the team together and always accepting incremental gains has kept the culture moving in their direction. The left is evil, the right is stupid.
MEN can also get preferential SBA funding and rates for "Women-owned businesses" merely by declaring they are "transwomen"!
DO IT!!!
You want to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Good luck with that.
We may not like this decision, but it essentially take the Supreme Court off the table for the 2020 campaign. That will help Trump, and I suspect that a lot of Democrats quietly wish they had lost this case.
The problem is more that families planning a funeral meet and deal with the director handling the funeral numerous times. There is no fading in the background then.
This also means that Catholic schools will no longer be able to terminate the employment of a teacher who declares they are in a same sex marriage or who decides they are the opposite sex and dresses so. It means that schools must allow students who declare they are the opposite sex full unencumbered access to all facilities and activities of that sex. So no more banning boys from the girl’s locker room or track team. It means a business’ health insurance policy must cover hormone treatments for transgenders and very likely surgery to change sex. It probably means that driver licenses must now be issued according to gender identity and not biological sex (even if there has been no actual sex change). In short a total disaster for religious, personal, and economic freedom.
Pedos next
What a freaking joke. As Justice Alito points out in his scathing dissent, Congress has unsuccessfully tried on multiple occasions to to amend the Civil Rights Act to ban discrimination based upon sexual orientation or identity. Roberts and Gorsuch simply rewrote the law to do what Congress has been unable to do — something that Congress would never have had to do if the Civil Rights Act already banned such discrimination.
The analogies that Gorsuch uses to support his opinion are ridiculous, if not pathetic. He opines, for example, that terminating the employment of a male because he is attracted to other men is discrimination based upon sex because it treats men who are attracted to men differently than women who are attracted to men. (You can’t make this crap up.) The analysis should be whether the employer treats men who are attracted to men differently from women who are attracted to women. If the employer treats gay men and gay women exactly the same, then there cannot possibly be discrimination based upon a person’s sex.
The left is evil, the right is stupid.
Or more likely the “right” really isn’t the right. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh certainly are not stupid.
I hear you, but I’m ready to concede defeat, at not until November.
A law only means what a judge says it means, not what it actually says.
Well, I’m sad to say I called it on Gorsuch. I was duped on Roberts.
Anyway, Leonard Leo has spent his whole career trying to prevent these sorts of things and this is a spectacular failure for him. I feel bad.
It’s clear, now that most of us are old, that we shouldn’t have relied upon on the Leonard Leos to save this country. Probably too late to save the country. Still, a Plan B is in order.
Go ahead, Billyboy.
I’m a business owner, and I could care less what you are if you show up, do your job and don’t make politics, religion or your queerness an issue with others here.
If you do I’ll let you go, period.
I’ll just have to document it very well, but we are an at will state, so pretty much hire and fire as required. I won’t deny you unemployment or try to cheat you out of what you’re entitled to, but I have to think about the whole and if you’re making everyone else upset, then goodbye.
The key is catching them before they create a problem, and that is why a good interview is important these days. Fortunately I own a tool and die / mold shop so it seems to be a trade that doesn’t attract alphabet entities much,
Ping
I increasingly see the Federalist Society as controlled opposition.
Alito might be the last legitimately conservative Justice who has slipped through:
https://reason.com/2019/05/13/kavanaugh-v-gorsuch/
While Pubbies tend to campaign on appointing a Thomas or Scalia, they go more for the Roberts model in reality.
You fire someone because they don’t do their job. They sue for discrimination. How do you prove it?
The lawyers are drooling.
The liberal wolves in sheep’s clothing on this site never ceases to amaze.
And it’s COULDN’T care less, not could.
Not surprised.
So day care centers, for instance, will now have to employ men who cut their !@(*#s off and prance around like they’re women because the “law” says so? And have those freaks “take care” of our children because a bunch of rich, elitist POS lawyers on the “Supreme Court” want to appear “fair and balanced” to their cocktail party buddies? Blank THAT.
Clearly, the leftists don’t give a damn about the law these days. In cases like this, I think it’s about time our side starts thinking the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.