{"id":1670,"date":"2017-12-14T19:12:27","date_gmt":"2017-12-14T19:12:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.jacksonwhitelaw.com\/az-labor-employment-law\/?page_id=1670"},"modified":"2024-11-22T00:48:07","modified_gmt":"2024-11-22T00:48:07","slug":"federal-law-protecting-gay-employees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jacksonwhitelaw.com\/az-labor-employment-law\/blog\/federal-law-protecting-gay-employees\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal Law Protecting Gay Employees"},"content":{"rendered":"

Title VII and the EEOC<\/h2>\n

Title VII<\/a> of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against employees and job-applicants based on an individual\u2019s race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. The federal law is enforced by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC<\/a>), which investigates charges of discrimination, determines wrongdoing, and has the authority to either settle charges with offending businesses or pursue litigation.<\/p>\n

While Title VII doesn\u2019t explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, the EEOC considers such discrimination an extension of the provision against sex-discrimination, and therefore finds discrimination against LGBT employees to be illegal under federal law.\u00a0 The organization formalized their opinion in a 2015 ruling by a 3-2 vote, and their decision was ratified by President Obama and the Justice Department at the time.<\/p>\n

Title VII and the federal courts<\/h2>\n

The EEOC\u2019s ruling is not legally binding to the courts, but as a general practice most courts defer to agency policy when considering applicable cases. While the Supreme Court has yet to issue a direct ruling on the matter, there are a number of federal court decisions that rule in favor of Title VII\u2019s provision on sex-discrimination extending to sexual orientation and gender identity.<\/p>\n

Title VII and the Department of Justice<\/h2>\n

In a surprising move, the DOJ under President Trump has reversed their position on the matter. In July of 2017, the DOJ submitted a brief as a friend of the court to a federal case of LGBT-discrimination in New York. In the brief, the DOJ asserts that because Title VII doesn\u2019t explicitly address sexual orientation or gender identity, neither is afforded protection under the federal law. The DOJ fails to take a stance on whether such discrimination is acceptable, instead deferring the matter to Congress by encouraging concerned legislators to formally amend the law to include provisions protecting the rights of LGBT employees.<\/p>\n

Given that understanding, it\u2019s safe to say that the EEOC whole-heartedly enforces against cases of discrimination against LGBT employees, but how that non-binding policy translates to the courts remains to be seen. Barring legislative action, the DOJ may continue to attempt to influence court decisions against the favor of LGBT employees.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

General examples of LGBT-related sex discrimination cases<\/h2>\n

Following are a handful of example situations that the EEOC deems to be unlawful sex-discrimination:<\/p>\n