Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Louis Foxwell
What the ruling actually says (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/17-1618_hfci.pdf):

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. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.

What the article falsely alleges:

six Supreme Court justices just decided that what the Southern racist really meant by “sex” was gay and transgender [...] The Gorsuch decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia find[s] that “sex” in Title VII covers any group having anything to do with sex

35 posted on 06/18/2020 6:42:07 AM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: NobleFree

Cherry picking .


38 posted on 06/18/2020 7:03:42 AM PDT by Albion Wilde ("When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice." --Donald Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

To: NobleFree
Is it too much to hope that SCOTUS already has set precedent on firings for violation of religious principle

In Hosanna‐Tabor Church v. EEOC (2012), the government sued a church school that fired a teacher for violating one of its religious tenets. The court ruled that punishing a church for not retaining an unwanted teacher violates the First Amendment.  

The court case above was a 9-0 rebuke of the Obama administration.

39 posted on 06/18/2020 7:24:26 AM PDT by Galatians513 (this space available for catchy tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson