The Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit Ruled For Gay Rights In A Major Discrimination Case

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,286
Story here.

A federal appeals court on Monday ruled that a 1964 civil rights law bans anti-gay workplace discrimination. The decision rebukes the Trump administration — which had argued against a gay worker in the case — and hands progressives a win in their strategy to protect LGBT employees with a drumbeat of lawsuits.

The dispute hinges on whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans discrimination on the basis of sex, also bans workplace discrimination due to sexual orientation.

This is the most interesting part of the decision, in terms of the reasoning:

"A woman who is subject to an adverse employment action because she is attracted to women would have been treated differently if she had been a man who was attracted to women," the majority wrote in an opinion led by Judge Robert Katzmann. "We can therefore conclude that sexual orientation is a function of sex and, by extension, sexual orientation discrimination is a subset of sex discrimination."
 

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,286
Oh, yes, now there's an argument. Whether it came from the attorneys or the court, it's hard to argue with.

It's an argument that's hard to defeat with logic and rationality. And I think it limits the scope of subsequent attempts to remove civil rights of various kinds from various groups.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,122
Reaction score
10,882
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
It's an argument that's hard to defeat with logic and rationality. And I think it limits the scope of subsequent attempts to remove civil rights of various kinds from various groups.

I think this gets at the heart of why the courts often differ with legislators and with popular votes with regards to human rights issues. Justices are more likely* to be swayed by logic and rationality in arguments, while people on the streets (and the legislators who want their votes) are more likely to be swayed by more emotional arguments based on unexamined assumptions.

It also explains why some people are so infuriated by the judicial branch.

*Obviously, there are notable exceptions, and with legislators picking judges, and popular votes in some states being able to recall them, we can't assume we will always have rational judges.
 
Last edited: