DOJ: Civil Rights Act Doesn’t Cover Discrimination Against Gay Employees

A state worker unfurls a rainbow flag in front of the Washington state Capitol to prepare it to be raised and then lowered to half-staff to mark last weekend's mass shooting at a central Florida nightclub, Wednesday,... A state worker unfurls a rainbow flag in front of the Washington state Capitol to prepare it to be raised and then lowered to half-staff to mark last weekend's mass shooting at a central Florida nightclub, Wednesday, June 15, 2016, in Olympia, Wash. Gov. Jay Inslee and members from the LGBT community later raised the flag in honor of Gay Pride month, before it was lowered. A gunman wielding an assault-type rifle and a handgun opened fire inside Pulse, a crowded gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, early Sunday, leaving at least 49 people dead in the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The Department of Justice filed a brief on Wednesday evening weighing in on a workplace discrimination case, arguing that gay and bisexual employees are not protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

The brief, filed in the case of a man who claims he was fired for being gay, states, “The sole question here is whether, as a matter of law, Title VII reaches sexual orientation discrimination. It does not, as has been settled for decades.”

It adds: “Any efforts to amend Title VII’s scope should be directed to Congress rather than the courts.”

The move seems to be at odds with the Trump administration’s official statement declaring that it would continue to enforce President Obama’s 2014 executive order prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating against LGBT employees.

“President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election,” according to the statement issued in January.

Now, his Justice Department is pushing back against past arguments by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual employees falls under sex discrimination.

The brief argues that because lesbian, gay and bisexual men and women get discriminated against equally, and homophobia isn’t rooted in the belief that one sex is superior to another, they can’t claim to be discriminated against on the basis of sex.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) slammed the move during an appearance on MSNBC, saying it was “antithetical to our core American values.”

“This is one of the reasons why I opposed Jeff Sessions in the first place,” she said. “It’s wrong, morally wrong.”

Another Democrat, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, released a statement: “Donald Trump promised the LGBT community he would fight for them. Now, on the same day he pledged to ban transgender Americans outright from serving in our armed forces, he dispatched his Justice Department to publicly argue in favor of workplace discrimination against gay Americans. I’m no longer surprised by the President’s hypocrisy. But I am offended by the cruelty of this assault on LGBT civil rights.”

As Whitehouse notes, the department filed the brief the same day President Trump announced on Twitter that transgender people would be banned from serving in the army “in any capacity.” The announcement sparked widespread criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike.

This post has been updated.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. Pretty soon (if he’s still around), Sessions will be issuing his guidance to federal agencies about all the ways their employees and contractors can discriminate against LGBTQ people by citing religious beliefs.

  2. Avatar for tsp tsp says:

    The brief argues that because lesbian, gay and bisexual men and women get discriminated against equally, and homophobia isn’t rooted in the belief that one sex is superior to another, they can’t claim to be discriminated against on the basis of sex.

    Thus proving that Separate but Equal targets of discrimination are perfectly within the intent of federal law.

  3. Rolls eyes. I fully expected this with Sessions at the helm. After so much progress for us in the LGBTQ community, the righties’ panties have been kinked up for quite awhile … and this is just their way of pulling at their crotches to try and unkink. Right, Mr. Sessions?

    edited for spelling

  4. Will the CRA now cover mentally ill drug addicts instead?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

70 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for k_in_va Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for amytales Avatar for sysprog Avatar for brutus1910 Avatar for becca656 Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for lastroth Avatar for boidster Avatar for shystr Avatar for ottnott Avatar for khaaannn Avatar for reggid Avatar for raincntry Avatar for tena Avatar for beattycat Avatar for tsp Avatar for pmaroneyb Avatar for katscherger Avatar for the_loan_arranger Avatar for karlwlewis Avatar for outsidertrading618

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: