Gay, transgender rights in spotlight as U.S. Supreme Court returns
Send a link to a friend
[October 07, 2019]
By Lawrence Hurley
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme
Court kicks off its new term this week, with a major dispute on tap over
whether a landmark decades-old federal anti-discrimination law that bars
sex discrimination in the workplace protects gay and transgender
employees.
The nine-month term opens on Monday with three cases to be argued before
the nine justices. On Tuesday, the court turns to one of the term's
biggest legal battles, with two hours of arguments scheduled in three
related cases on a major LGBT rights dispute.
At issue is whether gay and transgender people are covered by Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars employers from
discriminating against employees on the basis of sex as well as race,
color, national origin and religion.
President Donald Trump's administration has argued that Title VII does
not cover sexual orientation or gender identity.
The court, whose 5-4 conservative majority includes two Trump
appointees, will hear two cases about gay people who have said they were
fired due to their sexual orientation. One involves a former county
child welfare services coordinator from Georgia named Gerald Bostock.
The other involves a New York skydiving instructor named Donald Zarda.
He died after the case began and the matter is being pursued by his
estate.
"I didn't ask for any of this. I found myself in this situation. This is
a national issue of importance that needs to be confronted head on,"
Bostock said.
The third case involves a Detroit funeral home's bid to reverse a lower
court ruling that it violated Title VII by firing a transgender funeral
director named Aimee Stephens after Stephens revealed plans to
transition from male to female. Rulings in the cases are due by the end
of June.
"It would be nice if our rights were formally protected, that we have
the same basic human rights as everyone else. We are not asking for
anything special," Stephens said.
Trump, a Republican with strong support among evangelical Christian
voters, has taken aim at gay and transgender rights. His administration
has supported the right of certain businesses to refuse to serve gay
people on the basis of religious objections to gay marriage, restricted
transgender service members in the military and rescinded protections on
bathroom access for transgender students in public schools.
The legal fight focuses on the definition of "sex" in Title VII. The
plaintiffs, along with civil rights groups and many large companies,
have argued that discriminating against gay and transgender workers is
inherently based on their sex and consequently is unlawful.
Trump's Justice Department and the employers in the cases have argued
that Congress did not intend for Title VII to protect gay and
transgender people when it passed the law. Conservative religious groups
and various Republican-led states back the administration.
[to top of second column]
|
Supporters of gay marriage wave the rainbow flag after the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution provides same-sex
couples the right to marry at the Supreme Court in Washington June
26, 2015. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
Religious-based employers that expect workers to live in accordance
with their religious beliefs are concerned about facing increased
litigation.
"An expansion of the scope of Title VII will massively increase
church-state conflict," said Luke Goodrich, a lawyer at the Becket
Fund for Religious Liberty, a religious legal group.
ABORTION AND IMMIGRATION
The justices open the term on Monday with arguments in three cases
on whether Kansas can abolish the insanity defense in criminal
trials, whether the U.S. Constitution requires unanimous jury
verdicts and on fees in patent litigation.
Abortion rights also will figure prominently for the justices. The
court on Friday agreed to take up a major case that could lead to
new curbs on access to abortion as it considers the legality of a
Republican-backed Louisiana law that imposes restrictions on
abortion doctors.
The law, which the Supreme Court in February prevented from going
into effect while the litigation continues, includes a requirement
that doctors who perform abortions have a difficult-to-obtain
arrangement called "admitting privileges" at a hospital within 30
miles (48 km) of an abortion clinic.
The case will test the court's willingness to uphold
Republican-backed abortion restrictions being pursued in numerous
states. The Supreme Court struck down a similar Texas requirement in
2016 but the court has moved to the right since then. Anti-abortion
activists are hoping the justices will scale back or even overturn
the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion nationwide.
Other major cases on the horizon include Nov. 12 arguments over
Trump's move to end a program created by his Democratic predecessor
Barack Obama that protects from deportation hundreds of thousands of
immigrants - mostly Hispanic young adults - who were brought into
the United States illegally as children.
The court is also due in December to hear its first major gun rights
case in decade, although the justices potentially could dismiss it
because the New York City law being challenged by gun rights
advocates has been amended since the litigation began. Other
gun-related cases wait in the wings for possible action by the
justices.
(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Additional reporting by Andrew Chung;
Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |