EEOC Takes 'Zarda' LGBT Win on the Road to Another US Appeals Court
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Thursday renewed its push for sexual orientation workplace protections, urging a federal appeals court to embrace rulings that expanded anti-discrimination safeguards for LGBT employees.
March 08, 2018 at 03:28 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Thursday renewed its push for sexual orientation workplace protections, urging a federal appeals court to embrace rulings that expanded anti-discrimination safeguards for LGBT employees.
The EEOC filed a new friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, where a health care sales specialist claims a St. Louis-based Midwest Geriatric Management withdrew a job offer after learning he was gay.
The agency has been a leader in arguing that sexual orientation should be protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The commission previously argued for this interpretation successfully in the Seventh and Second Circuits. The Second Circuit, sitting en banc last month, adopted the EEOC's position. A three-judge panel in the Eleventh Circuit ruled against the EEOC's position.
➤➤ Get employment law news and commentary straight to your in-box with Labor of Law, a new Law.com briefing. Learn more and sign up here.
The Second Circuit's decision in Zarda v. Altitude Express, featured prominently in the EEOC's amicus brief in the Eighth Circuit. The EEOC's brief quotes from the Zarda decision: “The employer's failure to reference gender directly does not change the fact that a 'gay' employee is simply a man who is attracted to men.”
The Second Circuit, the EEOC said in its new brief, held that the relevant inquiry was not whether the employer also would have fired a lesbian but whether the employer would have fired a woman who was attracted to men.
The EEOC has argued, along with gay rights advocates, in recent years that sexual orientation should be considered sex under Title VII. Sex discrimination has evolved over the decades to include gender-based discrimination and sex stereotyping, and several circuits have also recognized gender identity.
Between January 2013, when the EEOC began tracking data, to September 2017, the agency received 5,822 charges of sexual orientation discrimination against private sector employers, labor organizations or local governments. Last year alone, there were 1,522 such charges.
The EEOC's new brief, posted below, sets the stage for another potential clash with the U.S. Justice Department, which argued against the agency's stance in the Second Circuit.
Whether and how long the EEOC advances support for sexual orientation protection could be determined by the confirmation of President Donald Trump's two nominees to the board. Trump nominated former Burlington Stores General Gounsel Janet Dhillon as chair and West Point professor Daniel Gade as a commission member. Both nominations are pending.
The Second Circuit decision followed a ruling in the Seventh Circuit last year that said federal civil rights laws protect sexual orientation.
EEOC Chair Victoria Lipnic called the Second Circuit ruling a “generous view of the law of employment protections, and a needed one.”
The firm Mathis, Marifian & Richter represents Matthew Horton, the challenger in the Eighth Circuit case. Lambda Legal joined the case in the appeal to the Eighth Circuit.
“We have taken huge strides in ensuring that federal courts across the country recognize that sexual orientation discrimination is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by federal law,” said Greg Nevins, employment fairness project director for Lambda Legal. “Thanks to the landmark decisions by the Second and Seventh Circuits, we have the wind on our backs and progress toward the correct understanding that the Civil Rights Act covers LGBT workers now is as inexorable as it is inevitable.”
Read more:
US Appeals Court Ruling Highlights 'Evolving Nature' of Title VII Protections
How PwC Handled Its First Transgender Employee Transition in the Workplace
Cameron Fox, Paul Hastings Employment Partner, on Workplace Diversity and More
Trump Administration Lines Up Against EEOC in LGBT Workplace Rights Case
Suspending Obama-Era Pay Data Rule Was Lawful, DOJ Tells Court
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 AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
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