Last Monday morning, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 extends to individuals identifying as gay or transgender. The majority position, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch stated:
“An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.”
Along with Justice Gorsuch, Chief Justice Roberts also supported the majority decision. Last year the House of Representatives passed The Equality Act or H.R. 5. This legislation sought to extend legal protection to individuals on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) through changes in the Civil Rights Act. H.R. 5 did not include protections for those who disagree with these lifestyles, undercutting our privacy and religious freedom. The Senate has yet to consider H.R. 5. However, now that the Supreme Court legislated rather than interpreted the law, the upper Chamber won’t have a chance to consider the legislation.
As Justice Alito wrote in the dissenting opinion:
“Usurping the constitutional authority of the other branches, the Court has essentially taken H. R. 5’s provision on employment discrimination and issued it under the guise of statutory interpretation. A more brazen abuse of our authority to interpret statutes is hard to recall.”
Justice Alito also had a list of several other breaches in the wall of civilization that will follow from this case. He noted that "Over 100 federal statutes prohibit discrimination because of sex.... As the briefing in these cases has warned, the position that the Court now adopts will threaten freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and personal privacy and safety. No one should think that the Court's decision represents an unalloyed victory for individual liberty." He then goes on to discuss: (i) "[B]athrooms, locker rooms, [and other things] of [that] kind"; (ii) "Women's sports"; (iii) "Housing"; (iv) "Employment by religious organizations"; (v) "Healthcare"; (vi) "Freedom of speech"; and (vii) "Constitutional claims."
“Today’s SCOTUS decision in Bostock v. Clayton County will have long-term consequences to our laws, our religious liberty, and an individual’s privacy,” said Eagle Forum President Colleen Holcomb. “An expansion of the definition of “sex” in our laws to include sexual orientation and gender identity hurts women and institutions and laws that protect them. Men pretending to be women now have permission from the U.S. Supreme Court to violate female privacy and safe spaces. Eagle Forum has been warning for decades, the battle against the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s, that prohibiting discrimination on the basis of “sex,” while described as “equality,” actually harms women.”
Back in September of 2019, Eagle Forum signed amicus briefs supporting the dissenting opinion before the U. S. Supreme Court on two cases, Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda and Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). These two cases were consolidated under Bostock v. Clayton County.