News

Supreme Court Makes Ruling That Workers Cannot Be Fired For Being Homosexual Or Transgender

Published

2 years ago

June 15, 2020

In news that shouldn’t surprise anyone in the slightest as it seems fairly obvious what direction such a case would go when it reached the bench of the Supreme Court, a decision by SCOTUS has affirmed that a person cannot be fired being gay or transgender.

The court’s vote was 6-3, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch siding with liberal justices in the case of Barstock v. Clayton County, which is actually a consolidation of cases where gay and transgender individuals argued that Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination on the basis of sex should be expanded.

Here’s more on the decision from The Washington Examiner:

“In Title VII, Congress adopted broad language making it illegal for an employer to rely on an employee’s sex when deciding to fire that employee. We do not hesitate to recognize today a necessary consequence of that legislative choice: An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender defies the law,” Gorsuch wrote in the court’s majority opinion.

The case was heard in October and was the court’s first on the issue since the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who delivered the decisive swing vote in 2015’s landmark Obergefell v. Hodges case that established a right to gay marriage. The arguments pitted two definitions of “sex” against each other: those in favor of transgender protections, arguing that it is determined by gender identity and those opposed advocating for the traditional biological definition.

Gorsuch, who usually rules with the court’s conservative wing, indicated then that he saw a strong case for employment protections for transgender people, based on precedent in past interpretations of “sex” as gender identity. Although he warned of “massive social upheaval” should the court rule in favor of transgender protections, Gorsuch said that he was “really close, really close” in thinking that Title VII could reasonably be interpreted to include them.

So what’s the big deal about this decision?

Well, the implications go far beyond the average employer and reach into the realm of religious institutions or businesses. Many such companies and organizations are against gay marriage and have stances on cultural issues like transgenderism that go against the prevailing liberal narrative. This ruling means that religious organizations may not be able to let go of employees based on lifestyles that offend their beliefs, which is in turn, a violation of their right of freedom of religion.

Imagine a church finding out one of the members of the senior pastoral staff is a homosexual and them not being able to let him go, despite his lifestyle choices conflicting with sacredly held beliefs about who has the right to teach and what to teach, to the congregation. That’s why this is problematic.

When it comes to normal, regular businesses that don’t have such religious foundations, it doesn’t make sense for someone who is gay or transgender to be fired over that particular lifestyle choice. It’s a whole new ballgame when it comes down to churches and other organizations with religious foundations who have beliefs that conflict with the ruling.

Facebook Twitter Gettr Gab

Up Next

An Open Letter to the Frightened Mom With An Addicted Son (Opinion)

Don't Miss

John Bolton Conducts First TV Interview About Tell-All Book Written About Working For Trump

News

Secret Service Shamed After Drunk Agents Assault Cab Driver in South Korea

There is a history of poor behavior from the Secret Service during Democratic administrations.

Published

3 days ago

May 20, 2022

Andrew West

Facebook Twitter Gettr Gab

You can tell a lot about a White House by the extracurricular nonsense that hits the press surrounding it.

For instance, after one of President Joe Biden’s dogs began biting random people on the grounds, we started hearing murmurs of just how terse and stressful the place had become, with dog behavior experts suggesting that the mood at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue might have a lot to do with the aggression.

This week, the Biden administration beget more bad behavior, but this time it wasn’t from one of the First Pets.

Two U.S. Secret Service agents in South Korea were sent stateside ahead of President Biden’s arrival following their involvement in an off-duty alcohol-related incident.

The two agents, whose identities have not been made public, are on their way back to Washington, D.C. where they will face disciplinary action, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News.

Both agents apparently became intoxicated while not on duty. One of the agents then got into an altercation with a cab driver.

There could be more trouble coming, as well.

In South Korea, officials send mediators to the scene of low-level disputes and then determine if criminal charges would be filed.

One of the agents was interviewed by authorities and no charges have been filed.

The government released one of its usual, dry, boilerplate-esque missives.

“The Secret Service is aware of an off-duty incident involving two employees which may constitute potential policy violations,” USSS chief spokesman Anthony Guglielmi told Fox News. “We have very strict protocols and policies for all employees and we hold ourselves to the highest professional standards.”

There is a history of poor behavior from the Secret Service during Democratic administrations, with a notable incident having occurred in 2012, involving Barack Obama’s agents and a Colombian prostitute.

Facebook Twitter Gettr Gab

You can tell a lot about a White House by the extracurricular nonsense that hits the press surrounding it. For instance, after one of President Joe Biden’s dogs began biting random people on the grounds, we started hearing murmurs of just how terse and stressful the place had become, with dog behavior experts suggesting that the mood at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue might have a lot to do with the aggression. This week, the Biden administration beget more bad behavior, but this time it wasn’t from one of the First Pets. Two U.S. Secret Service agents in South Korea were sent stateside ahead of President Biden’s arrival following their involvement in an off-duty alcohol-related incident. The two agents, whose identities have not been made public, are on their way back to Washington, D.C. where they will face disciplinary action, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News. Both agents apparently became intoxicated while not on duty. One of the agents then got into an altercation with a cab driver. There could be more trouble coming, as well. In South Korea, officials send mediators to the scene of low-level disputes and then determine if criminal charges would be filed. One of the agents was interviewed by authorities and no charges have been filed. The government released one of its usual, dry, boilerplate-esque missives. “The Secret Service is aware of an off-duty incident involving two employees which may constitute potential policy violations,” USSS chief spokesman Anthony Guglielmi told Fox News. “We have very strict protocols and policies for all employees and we hold ourselves to the highest professional standards.” There is a history of poor behavior from the Secret Service during Democratic administrations, with a notable incident having occurred in 2012, involving Barack Obama’s agents and a Colombian prostitute.