Support NeoGAF

[Shard]

https://www.aol.com/article/news/20...ts-lgbt-workers-from-workplace-bias/22026101/

April 4 (Reuters) - For the first time ever, a U.S. appeals court on Tuesday ruled that federal civilrights law protects lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees from discrimination in the workplace.

The ruling from a divided 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago represents a major legal victory for the gay rights movement.

It also allows a lawsuit to go forward in Indiana, where plaintiff Kimberly Hively said she lost her community college teaching job because she is lesbian.

In its 8-3 decision, the court bucked decades of rulings that gay people are not protected by the milestone civil rights law, because they are not specifically mentioned in it.


In her lawsuit, Hively said that Ivy Tech Community College in South Bend passed her over for a permanent position and refused to renew her contract as an adjunct professor after school administrators learned she is a lesbian.

 

[Escape Goat]

As an originalist, Scalia is spinning in his grave.

 

[Dai101]

As an originalist, Scalia is spinning in his grave.

Can we hook his carcass to a generator? Let's harness that hatred fueled energy!

 

[Transistor]

Can we hook his carcass to a generator? Let's harness that hatred fueled energy!

BUT THATS NOT COAL!

 

[Wilsongt]

BUT THATS NOT COAL!

No, but the courts will certainly make it a renewable source!

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

fantastic news

 

[Flying Toaster]

Thank fucking God.

 

[Rebel Leader]

BUT THATS NOT COAL!

Both are carbon based though.

Hook him up!

 

[capitalCORN]

BUT THATS NOT COAL!

He'll be coal soon enough.

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

Good news! Show this backwards ass state I live in what progress means.

 

[ICO_SotC]

Supposedly 8 of 11 of the judges are Republican appointees, so this can't be waved off a a liberal activist court decision.

 

[GameAddict411]

So the ruling applies nationwide? Or does it need to get to the supreme court before that happens?

 

[Metalingus5150]

Supposedly 8 of 11 of the judges are Republican appointees, so this can't be waved off a a liberal activist court decision.

I've already seen it happen tho. lol

 

[Volimar]

That's bananas. Hope this ends up having major ramifications for at will states that permit discrimination.

 

[Ac30]

So the ruling applies nationwide? Or does it need to get to the supreme court before that happens?

Please be true

 

[hateradio]

BUT THATS NOT COAL!

Fossil fuel.

Spoiler

Sorry... not sorry?

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Fucking awesome! A bright spot in a sea of bullshit.

 

[RinsFury]

Great news for once!

 

[Dude Abides]

So the ruling applies nationwide? Or does it need to get to the supreme court before that happens?

Only Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin.

 

[Futurevoid]

I love this bit from the report on thehill.com:

Judge Richard Posner had questioned John Maley, the attorney for the community college, in November about who would be hurt if "gays and lesbians have a little more job protection," according to reports.

At the time, Maley reportedly could not name anyone who would be hurt if the protections were extended.

In response, the judge responded: "So, what's the big deal?"

 

[guek]

So the ruling applies nationwide? Or does it need to get to the supreme court before that happens?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong (likely) but I believe it stands nationwide unless it the defendant appeals (also likely), in which case it could go to the supreme court for review if the appeal is granted. If the supreme court declines to see the case, the ruling falls to the lower court.

edit: or maybe it only stands in the 7th court, the hell do I know

edit2: actually, I think it would only go to the supreme court of there is a conflict in another district?

 

[Primus]

So this is in direct opposition to an 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling from last month, where a 2-1 decision said that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Means this is going to the Supreme Court, which by the time the case hits will again be on a 5-4 Conservative split.

 

[Captin Quacker]

so much winning

 

[ICO_SotC]

The NYTimes article said the college that was being sued does not plan to appeal this to the Supreme Court. They'll allow the case to go to trial court to determine whether they actually discriminated against the plaintiff, which is was this decision cleared the way for.

So if LGBT workplace discrimination makes it to the Supreme Court, it won't be becuase of this case...I think? The article wasn't clear.

 

[guek]

The NYTimes article said the college that was being sued does not plan to appeal this to the Supreme Court. They'll allow the case to go to trial court to determine whether they actually discriminated against the plaintiff, which is was this decision cleared the way for.

So if LGBT workplace discrimination makes it to the Supreme Court, it won't be becuase of this case...I think? The article wasn't clear.

It can if there's a conflict with another court

 

[Ac30]

So this is in direct opposition to an 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling from last month, where a 2-1 decision said that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Means this is going to the Supreme Court, which by the time the case hits will again be on a 5-4 Conservative split.

They went 5-4 on gay marriage, though.

 

[CDX]

So this is in direct opposition to an 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling from last month, where a 2-1 decision said that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Means this is going to the Supreme Court, which by the time the case hits will again be on a 5-4 Conservative split.

They went 5-4 on gay marriage, though.

Yeah. Trump (so far) only gets to replace Scalia. And Scalia was already conservative. So it doesn't really change much from what we already had.

The 5 majority that voted for gay marriage will all (hopefully) still be on the court.

Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan.

So if those 5 together want to rule in favor of LGBT rights again they could.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

👍

 

[metalslimer]

Pretty sure Kennedy sees gay rights as part of his legacy and wouldn't vote against if it made it that far

We cannot lose another liberal justice though or we are fucked for the next few decades

 

[Electric Eye]

Pretty sure Kennedy sees gay rights as part of his legacy and wouldn't vote against if it made it that far

We cannot lose another liberal justice though or we are fucked for the next few decades

We can't loose a conservative either because it just gets replaced by another. I know the older liberals want to retire but there is no way they do now at least not till 2020 and hopefully no more conservatives die/retire either till then.

 

[Ishan]

Btw to ppl who know can the Supreme Court only pick this up on appeals or decide to just rule cause of the differing lower court opinions , cause say it goes thru now and as with the gay marriage case they rule 5-4 for lgbt protections sets a Supreme Court ruling percent . Say no one appeals now . Something similar comes up few years down the line when Ginsberg may not be around now you may no longer still have the 5-4 ruling could swing the other way . So as a conservative maybe It would make sense to not appeal ? Take the loss now but not the bigger loss of a supreme court ruling ?Hence the question .

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Supposedly 8 of 11 of the judges are Republican appointees, so this can't be waved off a a liberal activist court decision.

RINOs!