This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Bostock v. Clayton County: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|date=June 15, 2020 | |date=June 15, 2020 | ||
|subject=Business Associations | |subject=Business Associations | ||
| | |appealed_from=11th Circuit | ||
|facts=Bostock (plaintiff) worked for 10 years as a child-welfare advocate for [https://www.claytoncountyga.gov/ Clayton County], Georgia (defendant). | |facts=Bostock (plaintiff) worked for 10 years as a child-welfare advocate for [https://www.claytoncountyga.gov/ Clayton County], Georgia (defendant). | ||
Bostock was dismissed shortly after he starting to play for a gay softball league. | |||
|procedural_history=Bostock sued for gender discrimination under [https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964]. | |||
11th Circuit rules against Bostock because romantic orientation ("homosexuality") isn't listed in Title VII. | |||
|issues=Does Title VII protect on the basis of gender traits (romantic orientation being same-gender affinity & identity with affirmation being described as trans)? | |||
|arguments=Bostock's employer did not explicitly inform he that he was being fired for being LGBT. The pretext used to dismiss him was that an internal audit of his welfare program revealed that he [https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/17-1618 mis-managed program funds]. | |||
|holding=Yes. Title VII protects from labor discrimination based on gender traits (romantic orientation & [https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/gender-affirmation affirmed identity]). | |||
|reasons=Characteristics derived from gender makes '''but-for causation''' clear in these cases; that is, whenever a particular outcome wouldn't have happened but for the purported cause. | |||
|comments=[[Samuel Alito]] dissented by stating the [[Congress]] has for many years failed to add orientation & affirmed identity to protected categories. The [https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s393 Equality Act] has failed to pass. | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/bostock-v-clayton-county | |link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/bostock-v-clayton-county | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |source_type=Video summary | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |||
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |||
|link=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/590/17-1618/ | |||
|case_text_source=Justia | |||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:41, July 14, 2023
| Bostock v. Clayton County | |
| Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | June 15, 2020 |
| Appealed from | 11th Circuit |
Facts
Bostock (plaintiff) worked for 10 years as a child-welfare advocate for Clayton County, Georgia (defendant).
Bostock was dismissed shortly after he starting to play for a gay softball league.Procedural History
Bostock sued for gender discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
11th Circuit rules against Bostock because romantic orientation ("homosexuality") isn't listed in Title VII.Issues
Does Title VII protect on the basis of gender traits (romantic orientation being same-gender affinity & identity with affirmation being described as trans)?
Arguments
Bostock's employer did not explicitly inform he that he was being fired for being LGBT. The pretext used to dismiss him was that an internal audit of his welfare program revealed that he mis-managed program funds.
Holding
Yes. Title VII protects from labor discrimination based on gender traits (romantic orientation & affirmed identity).
Reasons
Characteristics derived from gender makes but-for causation clear in these cases; that is, whenever a particular outcome wouldn't have happened but for the purported cause.
Comments
Samuel Alito dissented by stating the Congress has for many years failed to add orientation & affirmed identity to protected categories. The Equality Act has failed to pass.
