Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Amicus Curiae Brief Of Equality Ohio In Support Of Intervenor Urging Reversal, Doron M. Kalir, Kenneth J. Kowalski
Amicus Curiae Brief Of Equality Ohio In Support Of Intervenor Urging Reversal, Doron M. Kalir, Kenneth J. Kowalski
Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents
Title VII’s plain language bars discharge of “any individual”—whether transgender or not—“because of such individual’s . . . sex.” It applies whenever employers take gender into account in making employment decisions. It is undisputed that the employer in this case based his decision to terminate Ms. Stephens solely on sex-based considerations. To be sure, he could have terminated Ms. Stephens for a wide array of reasons—tardiness, failure to perform, disciplinary issues—or for no reason at all. Under those circumstances, such termination—even of a transgender person—would not be “because of such individual’s sex.” But that is not the case here. Here, …
Frontiers Of Sex Discrimination Law, Jessica A. Clarke
Frontiers Of Sex Discrimination Law, Jessica A. Clarke
Michigan Law Review
Review Gender Nonconformity and the Law by Kimberly A. Yuracko.
Against Gay Potemkin Villages: Title Vii And Sexual Orientation Discrimination, Anthony Michael Kreis
Against Gay Potemkin Villages: Title Vii And Sexual Orientation Discrimination, Anthony Michael Kreis
All Faculty Scholarship
Should Title VII allow employers to invoke a “love the sin, hate the sinner” defense to escape liability for firing lesbians, gays, and bisexuals? According to one prominent federal judge, the answer is “yes.”This Essay examines federal judges’ evolving and correct recognition that sexual orientation discrimination claims are colorable under Title VII’s existing framework. The Essay compares the arguments concerning the actionability of sexual orientation claims laid forth in the Second Circuit (Christiansen v. Omnicom), the 7th Circuit (Hively v. Ivy Tech), and the Eleventh Circuit (Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital).The Essay argues against the position taken by one member …
Same-Sex Sex And Immutable Traits: Why Obergefell V. Hodges Clears A Path To Protecting Gay And Lesbian Employees From Workplace Discrimination Under Title Vii, Matthew W. Green Jr.
Same-Sex Sex And Immutable Traits: Why Obergefell V. Hodges Clears A Path To Protecting Gay And Lesbian Employees From Workplace Discrimination Under Title Vii, Matthew W. Green Jr.
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
This article is set forth in five parts. Part II is largely descriptive and focuses on two aspects of Obergefell: (1) the Court's clarification that adult, private, consensual, same-sex sexual intimacy is a fundamental right, protected by the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and (2) the Court's recognition that leading mental health and medical groups consider sexual orientation to be immutable. Part III examines how courts and the EEOC have treated sexual orientation discrimination under Title VII and contains a normative discussion which argues—consistent with the position of other commentators, some courts, and the EEOC—that sexual orientation …