Gerald Bostock Was Fired. He Wants His Supreme Court Case to Help Change LGBTQ Rights in America.

20. září 2019, 10:43
Článek přečten: 4 krát.

Gerald Bostock Was Fired. He Wants His Supreme Court Case to Help Change LGBTQ Rights in America.Courtesy Gerald BostockGerald Bostock relished doing his job. He was proud of helping young people. Until 2013 he worked for Clayton County, Georgia, managing the county’s CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates) program, which trained and assigned volunteers to represent children who have experienced abuse or neglect in court proceedings.“Imagine having a job you love, that’s your dream job, and all of sudden losing it,” Bostock, 55, from Doraville, Georgia, told The Daily Beast. In 2013, Bostock was suddenly fired by Clayton County. Bostock claims it was because he is gay, the firing coming after it was revealed to colleagues that he played for a local gay softball league. He was also subject to homophobic slurs, he claims.Now Bostock’s case is one of three historic LGBTQ discrimination cases that will be heard at the Supreme Court on Oct. 8. (The Daily Beast reported on the other two cases, involving former funeral director Aimee Stephens and skydiver Donald Zarda, in detail recently.)Inside the Supreme Court Discrimination Cases That Could Change LGBTQ RightsIn all three cases, SCOTUS will consider—and ultimately adjudicate—whether current sex discrimination laws protect LGBTQ people from workplace discrimination. “For me it has been extremely emotional,” Bostock told The Daily Beast of the last six years of legal fighting. “I lost my livelihood, and my source of income. I even lost my medical insurance, and at a time I was just recovering from prostate cancer. It’s been a long six-year journey not only to clear my name, but also help make it so no one has to go to work in fear of being fired for who they are, how they identify, and who they love.”The lawyers in all three SCOTUS cases claim that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin, includes sexual orientation and gender identity, under the “sex” classification.All three cases represent as momentous a moment for LGBTQ rights and equality at the Supreme Court as the Defense of Marriage Act and marriage equality rulings did in 2013 and 2015, respectively.Two of the cases focus on gay-related discrimination and will be heard together—Bostock’s and Zarda’s. The case of Stephens, who alleges her employer discriminated against her because she is transgender, will be heard separately.The cases are being heard against the backdrop of the stymied passage of the Equality Act, which would enshrine anti-LGBTQ discrimination protections in federal law (28 states presently have no protections for LGBTQ employees). The act passed in the House of Representatives but has little chance of getting passed in a Republican-controlled Senate.Thomas J. Mew, partner at Buckley Beal in Atlanta and one of Bostock’s attorneys, told The Daily Beast: “This is a landmark case because we’re in a situation where right now in too many parts of the country a gay or lesbian individual can marry their partner on Sunday and then be fired for their sexual orientation on Monday.”Mew said, “What this situation is screaming out for is a uniform federal standard, and application of the law that protects LGBTQ men and women. Whether the individual is protected or not from discrimination should never be contingent on the luck of the geographical draw.”As summarized by SCOTUSBlog, Bostock claimed that the county falsely accused him of mismanaging public money, when it really fired him for being gay.In the other cases, lower courts have delivered rulings in favor of Zarda and Stephens. But so far in Bostock’s case, a district court ruled that Title VII did not cover sexual orientation, a ruling upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit—and so Bostock has brought his case to the Supreme Court.Brian J. Sutherland, partner at Buckley Beal and another of Bostock’s attorneys, told The Daily Beast that the “plain language of the Civil Rights Act clearly applies to sexual orientation. You can’t consider a person’s sexual orientation without considering his or her sex, and you can’t consider a person’s sex when you’re making an employment decision against them.”A spokesperson for Clayton County, Georgia, told The Daily Beast they would not discuss the case, adding: “We do not comment on pending litigation.”Jennifer King, executive director of Georgia CASA, told The Daily Beast that the organization was aware of the Supreme Court case “and its potential to further Číst celý článek >>> Přeložit do en

Zveřejněte komentář na FB.

Líbí se Vám tato stránka? Sdílejte ji s ostatními.

Přidat.eu záložku


+ Přidej RSS kanál | Copyright (c) 2009 Seznam.name. All rights reserved. Created by Kukej | Kontakt | Výměna odkazů