The rulings - in two gay rights cases from Georgia and NY and a transgender rights case from MI involving a funeral home employee - recognize new worker protections in federal law.
In a historic decision Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 extends protection to gay and transgender workers from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
The justices decided that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis on sex, also applies to sexual orientation.
"There is simply no escaping the role intent plays here: Just as sex is necessarily a but-for cause when an employer discriminates against homosexual or transgender employees, an employer who discriminates on these grounds inescapably intends to rely on sex in its decisionmaking", the opinion read. We do not hesitate to recognize today a necessary outcome of that legislative choice: "An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender defies the law". The court recognized that when a lesbian, gay or bisexual person is treated differently because of discomfort or disapproval that they are attracted to people of the same sex, that's discrimination based on sex.
The Harris Funeral Homes case centered on Aimee Stephens, a trans woman fired after her boss claimed it would violate "God's commands" if he allowed her "to deny [her] sex while acting as a representative of [the] organization.".
"The answer is clear", wrote Justice Gorsuch.
The decision was hailed by many Democratic leaders, including Pete Buttigieg, the former Army officer and mayor who became the first openly gay person to run for the Democratic presidential nomination.
"There is only one word for what the court has done today: legislation", Alito wrote.
Google Stadia now supports more OnePlus smartphones
On the other hand, Google Play Store will also be reviewing all Android apps requesting background location access . With this, the manufacturer becomes the first phone manufacturers to publish an Android 11 version.
The decision was a defeat not just for the employers, but also the Trump administration, which argued that the law's plain wording compelled a ruling for the employers.
Judicial Crisis Network, a "powerful dark money group pushing [the] court to right", ran a $10 million campaign in 2017 to force Gorsuch onto the bench.
"The court has caught up to the majority of our country, which already knows that discriminating against LGBTQ people is both unfair and against the law", he said in a statement. But the decision to protect gay, lesbian and transgender individuals from discrimination was the opposite: The six justices in the majority clearly followed the law.
The Supreme Court combined 2 cases. a man in Clayton County, GA who claimed he was sacked as a social worker after he became more open about being gay, and a man fired as a skydiving instructor. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Trump's other Supreme Court pick, dissented, along with Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
Is a combined ruling is a combined one for three cases Bostock v. Clayton, Altitude v. Zarda, and R.G.
Donald Zarda, a skydiving instructor, also brought a lawsuit in NY after he was sacked from his job for mentioning he was gay. If the employer retains an otherwise identical employee who was identified as female at birth, the employer intentionally penalizes a person identified as male at birth for traits or actions that it tolerates in an employee identified as female at birth.
"The Court tries to convince readers that it is merely enforcing the terms of the statute, but that is preposterous".
The ACLU, which represented two plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case, gave credit to the victory to countless LGBTQ Americans who fought over the past five decades for equality in the workplace.