Great Decision in Our Transgender Discrimination Case Against the

[Natasha]

Great Decision in Our Transgender Discrimination Case Against the
Library of Congress!

http://blog.aclu.org/2008/09/19/great-decision-in-our-transgender-discrimination-case-against-the-library-of-congress/
9/19/2008

The big news is that the court ruled that discriminating against
someone for changing genders is sex discrimination under federal law.
In reaching its decision, the court ruled: "The evidence established
that the Library was enthusiastic about hiring David Schroer — until
she disclosed her transsexuality. The Library revoked the offer when
it learned that a man named David intended to become, legally,
culturally, and physically, a woman named Diane. This was
discrimination 'because of . . . sex.'"

[glendagladwitch]

Wow. I'm stunned. The Court went beyond holding, as expected, that Schroer could recover on the basis of discrimination for gender non-conforming appearance or behavior under the Price-Waterhouse line of cases. It additionally held that firing someone for transitioning from one sex to another is literally sex discrimination. That holding directly challenges the Ulane and Etsitty decisions, among others.

[Kate Thomas]

Yes Glenda its true!  Judge Robertson has written a decision that may be able to bring Title VII into the new millennia.

Arthur S. Leonard

This case could be the vehicle to get the issue of whether Title VII forbids employment discrimination against transsexuals before the Supreme Court, but the Court relatively recently ducked the question by refusing to review a decision in Barnes v. City of Cincinnati, 401 F.3d 729 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 624 (2005), which had ruled in favor of a transsexual plaintiff using the sex stereotyping theory.  Robertson's decision provides a new theory for the Supreme Court's consideration.

Click your heels three times, and say  .  .  .  .