Law Commons^™

Protecting Our Protectors: Why Title Vii Should Apply To The Uniformed Military Following The Supreme Court's Decision In Bostock V. Clayton County, Jonathan A. D'Orazio, Jd Candidate, 2022

Marquette Benefits and Social Welfare Law Review

This Note argues that Title VII should apply to uniformed military members following the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020). Foremost, the current intra‑military remedies uniformed military members may bring a discrimination claim pursuant fail to effectively combat discrimination in the United States military due to several critical deficiencies. This Note demonstrates that the defects within the current intra‑military remedies tacitly permit, rather than discourage, discriminatory conduct.

This Note then examines why the military has historically resisted civilian reform measures to the military justice system. During this examination, this Note argues that …

Necessary Coverage For Authentic Identity: How Bostock Made Title Vii The Strongest Protection Against Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Denial Of Gender-Affirming Medical Care., Jennifer A. Knackert

Marquette Law Review

In June 2020, the United States Supreme Court held that Title VII

protection from discrimination on the basis of sex extended to LGBTQ+

employees. The Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia decision dealt with three

separate cases where LGBTQ+ employees had been fired from their jobs based

on either their sexual orientation or gender identity. While the shared issue in

these cases had to do with employee termination, the textualist argument

presented by the Court leads many legal scholars to believe that the holding

would be applicable to other areas of employment discrimination covered by

Title VII such as employer-sponsored healthcare …