SkipCaptcha
31
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 12:
Line 12: + + −
Bostock v. Clayton County (view source)
Revision as of 16:56, October 22, 2020
, 16:56, October 22, 2020added to case history
==Case History==
==Case History==
Each employee sued for sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The lawsuits brought by Mr. Zarda and Mr. Stephens were allowed to proceed by the Second and Sixth Circuits, respectively. On the other hand, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that it was not illegal for Clayton County, under the text of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to fire Mr. Bostock for being homosexual; therefore, it was appropriate to dismiss the claim as a matter of law.<ref name="ref1"/>
Each employee sued for sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The lawsuits brought by Mr. Zarda and Mr. Stephens were allowed to proceed by the Second and Sixth Circuits, respectively. On the other hand, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that it was not illegal for Clayton County, under the text of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to fire Mr. Bostock for being homosexual; therefore, it was appropriate to dismiss the claim as a matter of law.<ref name="ref1"/>
The Supreme court ruled by a vote of 6 to 3 that employment discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch voted with the liberals, with Justice Gorsuch writing the opinion that articulated the reasoning behind the Court's majority decision.
==See also==
==See also==
* [[Neil Gorsuch]]
* [[Neil Gorsuch]]
==References==
==References==
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
[[Category:Judicial Activism]]
[[Category:Judicial Activism]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]