Big Backlash: Mega Corporations Push Back Against Trump Over Transgender Rights
Microsoft Corp., Google Inc. and The Coca-Cola Co. were among 56 companies pushing back against recent attempts by the Trump administration to reduce protections for transgender people.
November 01, 2018 at 02:30 PM
4 minute read
Dozens of companies, including Microsoft Corp., Google Inc. and The Coca-Cola Co., pushed back against recent attempts by the Trump administration to reduce protections for transgender people under federal civil rights laws. They instead stressed the importance of equality in a public statement released Thursday.
The 56 companies include major financial institutions, tech companies and retail giants, among other household names, such as JPMorgan Chase & Co., Deutsche Bank, IBM Corp. and American Airlines. The effort was organized by 14 LGBT advocacy groups, including Out Leadership and the Human Rights Campaign.
“We're proud that the business community is raising its voice to defend some of the most vulnerable members of our society and helping to fill the leadership vacuum created by the federal government,” Todd Sears, founder and principal of Out Leadership, said in a statement.
The letter comes a week after the U.S. Justice Department told the U.S. Supreme Court that a transgender worker should not be guaranteed federal civil rights protections under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, veering from the position of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC sued a Michigan funeral home for firing Aimee Stephens, who had presented as a man for six years as funeral director before she came out as transgender to her bosses and co-workers.
Related story: Justice Dept. Takes Stance Against Transgender Rights—and the EEOC—in Supreme Court
The New York Times first reported plans to redefine “gender” under federal civil rights laws under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act to specify that gender refers to the sex a person is at birth. This proposal would effectively erase protections for transgender students.
U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has argued in trial and appeals courts against protections for both gender identity and sexual orientation under Title VII. Last year, the Justice Department, lining up against the EEOC, told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that federal civil rights protections do not extend to gay and lesbian employees.
The business group's letter called for the millions of people who identify as transgender, gender nonbinary, or intersex “to be treated with the respect and dignity everyone deserves” and calls “for respect and transparency in policy-making, and for equality under the law for transgender people.”
“We oppose any administrative and legislative efforts to erase transgender protections through reinterpretation of existing laws and regulations,” the letter continues. “We also fundamentally oppose any policy or regulation that violates the privacy rights of those that identify as transgender, gender non-binary, or intersex.”
The group notes that dozens of federal courts have upheld the rights of transgender people. At least five federal appeals courts, for instance, upheld protections of gender identity under Title VII. Those protections protect workers from discrimination against their employers.
Fortune 500 companies and large business have adopted LGBT inclusive policies that include anti-discrimination, specialized training programs and other benefits.
The Supreme Court could consider how far to extend the scope of protections in the workplace, under Title VII, this term with the Stephens case, R.G.G. Harris Funeral Home v. EEOC, and two others from the Second and Eleventh circuits that focus on whether protections extend to sexual orientation.
Business groups and major companies have sided with the LGBT workers in the lower courts on these cases and others, pushing for equality and arguing that protections would be better for their bottom lines.
Yet a recent report from the Human Rights Campaign Foundation found that nearly half of gay and transgender workers remain closeted at work, a statistic that has remained largely unchanged in the last decade. The group tracks LGBT policies at major companies across the country, and has found a record number of companies are adopting progressive policies for gay and transgender workers.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLaw Firms Expand Scope of Immigration Expertise Amid Blitz of Trump Orders
6 minute readZoom Faces Intellectual Property Suit Over AI-Based Augmented Video Conferencing
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250