Posted on 12/11/2017 7:49:19 AM PST by GonzoII
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, a case about a Georgia security guard who said she was harassed at work because she is a lesbian.
Attorneys representing Jameka Evans, the security guard, wanted the high court to overturn an 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling and decide that sexual orientation discrimination violates the Civil Rights Act.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Opps! Looks like she will have to fall back to hoping that she wins the lottery.
Finally, a majority of judges that don’t see it as their job to add “rights” to laws where We The People have not added those rights.
Blue eyed and Blond Jameka Evans I’m sure.
The motion of 76 Businesses and Organizations for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted. The motion of Anti-Discrimination Scholars for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted. The motion of GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted. The motion of David Boyle for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
She looks a lot like Rachael Dolezal used to look...
Close
I noted that Microsoft, Facebook, and Starbucks all filed amicus curae briefs in support of the plaintiff, implying that they would hire this woman. There are many jobs in many organizations for which a person’s sexual orientation should not matter one whit. And others in which it would matter a great deal. The problem on this topic arises when an advocate party tries to force their position on everyone else in the public square. Just my two cents.
Lesbian because she wasn’t getting any hits as a straight, maybe? My guess is that she sued as a means of chumming for interest; and if she lucked out and hit a jackpot, that would be all the better.
that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin
Oh. Never mind.
ussc ain't gots time fo dat !
Some states do, by including sexual orientation or preference in their laws.
MAGA
Sexual orientation is not a protected class under Georgia’s anti-discrimination laws. Neither does Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
An impossible request. The USSC accepts a case (grants certiorari) when four or more justices vote to do so, and frustratingly it never, ever explains why when fewer than four so vote. However, very rarely a Justice will post a written dissent from the decision not to grant certiorari, and he may include his (biased) view of the majority's rationale. That dissent, if any, will be posted here; in this case, none has yet done so.
An employee’s sexual activity does not belong in the workplace.
No one should even know she’s a lesbian as it has nothing to do with work. She may be sexually harassing people by addressing her personal and private sexual pleasures to other employees.
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.