- Andrew Yang upset porn fans with his criticism of Bing Tuesday 10:34 PM
- Kamala Harris really wants Trump kicked off Twitter Tuesday 10:22 PM
- Bernie Sanders jokes he didn’t use medical marijuana before tonight’s debate Tuesday 9:47 PM
- Tulsi Gabbard says she’s not a Russian asset—which is just what a Russian asset would say Tuesday 9:20 PM
- Warren says she doesn’t have a ‘beef with billionaires’ Tuesday 8:59 PM
- Andrew Yang’s Universal Basic Income plan gets support from other candidates Tuesday 8:40 PM
- Christmas creep is real, and it’s all over Tom Steyer’s neck Tuesday 8:05 PM
- Stans are using pictures of Beyoncé to catfish sugar daddies Tuesday 7:18 PM
- Wait, who the heck is Tom Steyer? Tuesday 7:17 PM
- Teacher caught on video in racist rant put on leave without pay Tuesday 5:44 PM
- Pornhub pulls Girls Do Porn videos amid sex trafficking charges Tuesday 4:49 PM
- Gina Rodriguez sings N-word on Instagram story Tuesday 4:41 PM
- Trump Jr. mocked for Hunter Biden tweet about profiting from dad’s name Tuesday 3:58 PM
- All the holiday movies and shows coming to Netflix in 2019 Tuesday 3:48 PM
- Smoke ’em, pass ’em Week 7: The QB blues Tuesday 3:29 PM
LGBTQ workers are protected by the Civil Rights Act, federal court rules
The decision was 10-3.
A federal appeals court ruled Monday that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects people from workplace discrimination based on their sexual orientation. The ruling is a win for LGBTQ rights activists—and a loss for the Trump administration, which had opposed a gay worker in the case.
In a 10-3 decision, the court ruled in favor of Donald Zarda, who had complained in 2010 that he was fired for being gay. Zarda died in a base jumping incident before the case ended, but the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission argued on his behalf that his employers violated the Civil Rights Act when they ended his employment.
The court ruled that LGBTQ discrimination is inextricable from gender, and therefore falls under the “sex” bias prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
“A woman who is subject to an adverse employment action because she is attracted to women would have been treated differently if she had been a man who was attracted to women,” the majority wrote in an opinion led by Judge Robert Katzmann. “We can therefore conclude that sexual orientation is a function of sex and, by extension, sexual orientation discrimination is a subset of sex discrimination.”
Former President Barack Obama’s administration had supported that Title VII covers anti-gay discrimination. But after President Donald Trump took office, the Department of Justice argued the opposite.
“The essential element of sex discrimination under Title VII is that employees of one sex must be treated worse than similarly situated employees of the other sex, and sexual orientation discrimination simply does not have that effect,” the Department of Justice wrote in a brief in the case, according to BuzzFeed News.
Following the ruling, the case could next be going to the Supreme Court.
Kris Seavers is the IRL editor for the Daily Dot. Her work has appeared in Central Texas publications, including Austin Monthly and San Antonio Magazine, and on NPR.