Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Major Nikon

(36,922 posts)
14. There are those who aren't so sure that's the only remedy
Fri Jan 18, 2019, 02:20 PM
Jan 2019

There have been numerous legal attempts to argue laws against sexual discrimination must include sexual orientation. Some have been successful and some have not.

The current position of the EEOC is sexual orientation is included in laws that prohibit sexual discrimination in employment practices. While that isn't the same law that protects sexual discrimination in housing practices, it's not that much of a leap in jurisprudence.

Overview

EEOC interprets and enforces Title VII's prohibition of sex discrimination as forbidding any employment discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation. These protections apply regardless of any contrary state or local laws.

Through investigation, conciliation, and litigation of charges by individuals against private sector employers, as well as hearings and appeals for federal sector workers, the Commission has taken the position that existing sex discrimination provisions in Title VII protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) applicants and employees against employment bias. The Commission has obtained approximately $6.4 million in monetary relief for individuals, as well as numerous employer policy changes, in voluntary resolutions of LGBT discrimination charges under Title VII since data collection began in 2013. A growing number of court decisions have endorsed the Commission's interpretation of Title VII.
https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/enforcement_protections_lgbt_workers.cfm

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

That's not what the judge said. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #1
Actions speak louder than words Cartoonist Jan 2019 #2
Where in the judge's opinion does it say that? The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #4
Who said this? Cartoonist Jan 2019 #9
The managers of the place the couple wanted to move to said that. Not the judge. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #10
There's nothing in the judge's opinion suggesting anything of the kind. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #8
I thought women were smarter Cartoonist Jan 2019 #11
She wasn't being dumb. She was following the law, which is her obligation. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #13
There are those who aren't so sure that's the only remedy Major Nikon Jan 2019 #14
It would be too much of a leap for a trial judge because it would be contrary to The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #15
I'm not disputing that part Major Nikon Jan 2019 #16
Missouri continues its 'show me' attitude of hate and animosity towards all but old white men... SWBTATTReg Jan 2019 #3
This is so damn absurd! Pulls the bible outta his ass and says this, FFS!!! n/t RKP5637 Jan 2019 #5
The judge is a "she," not a "he," The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #20
Thanks for the correction!!! RKP5637 Jan 2019 #21
is that some sort of church affiliated religious housing? AlexSFCA Jan 2019 #6
The judge's opinion is at the link. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #7
Gonna have to go with The Velveteen Ocelot on this one uriel1972 Jan 2019 #12
Our Mission struggle4progress Jan 2019 #17
I don't think *I'd* want to live there. The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 2019 #18
I try to fight some battles I'm sure to win when I want to fight some I won't struggle4progress Jan 2019 #19
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Judge says Bible is rule ...»Reply #14