National
Despite court ruling, EEOC to continue taking anti-gay bias claims
7th Circuit found ‘no protection from nor redress for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation’
The EEOC will continue to accept claims of anti-gay discrimination as gender discrimination. (Image public domain)
Despite a federal appeals court ruling that determined current law provides “no protection from nor redress for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,” the U.S. agency charged with enforcing federal workplace civil rights law will continue to accept and investigate charges of anti-gay employment discrimination in the court’s jurisdiction.
Justine Lisser, a spokesperson for the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said Friday her agency will “continue to investigate cases despite an adverse decision” from the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals contrary to the commission’s policy of investigating claims of anti-gay discrimination as gender discrimination.
The response, Lisser said, comes from the Office of Field Programs, which oversees all the district offices and sets policy for investigations, and is based on the fact the commission “enforces laws that apply nationwide.”
“Unless the commission issues policy to the contrary, we will follow current commission policy and continue to accept and investigate charges alleging sex discrimination that is based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” Lisser concluded.
Last week, a three-judge panel on the Seventh Circuit determined Title VII of Civil Rights of Act of 1964 provided no recourse for Kimberly Hively, a lesbian law professor alleging workplace discrimination at Ivy Tech Community College. The school has denied the allegations.
U.S. Circuit Judge Ilana Rovner, the judge writing the decision, admitted “it seems illogical to entertain” the idea laws against sex discrimination cover gender non-conformity, but not sexual orientation, but nonetheless refused to change precedent in the jurisdiction to allow the claim of anti-gay discrimination to go forward.
The decision runs contrary to the EEOC’s determination last year in the case of Baldwin v. Foxx, which started a precedent enabling the agency to take and investigate claims of sexual-orientation workplace bias as gender discrimination. In 2011, the agency found in the case of Macy v. Holder transgender discrimination constitutes gender discrimination under Title VII.
Lambda Legal, which represents Hively, has said it intends to pursue an “en banc” review of the three-judge panel’s decision before the full Seventh Circuit. The judicial circuit consists of Wisconsin and Illinois, which have state laws barring anti-gay discrimination, and Indiana, which doesn’t.
Even though the three-judge panel refused to change precedent within the 7th Circuit, the EEOC can still mediate with companies that engage in anti-gay discrimination to obtain conciliation, or else take those companies to federal court for a costly legal battle.
Despite EEOC policy, many LGBT advocates have asserted there’s no recourse for anti-LGBT workplace discrimination under current law because neither sexual orientation nor gender identity is explicitly included under federal civil rights law. These advocates often assert the maxim a gay person can be married on Sunday, then fired on Monday when that union becomes public.
Tico Almeida, president of the LGBT group Freedom to Work, said Indiana workers who feel they’ve faced anti-LGBT employment discrimination should file claims with the EEOC even without explicit protections under federal law.
“If a gay, lesbian or bisexual Hoosier is married on Sunday and fired on Monday, we recommend they contact an attorney and file a Title VII sex discrimination claim with the EEOC’s office in Indianapolis,” Almeida said. “The three judges from the Hively decision are not the final word on this legal question, and in the meantime, hundreds of LGBT workers have recently won recourse by fighting back against discrimination and filing claims at the EEOC.”
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
Congratulations to Gil Pontes III on his recent appointment to the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors, Fla. Upon being appointed he said, “I’m honored to join the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors at such an important moment for our community. In my role as Executive Director of the NextGen Chamber of Commerce, I spend much of my time focused on economic growth, fiscal sustainability, and the long-term competitiveness of emerging business leaders. I look forward to bringing that perspective to Wilton Manors — helping ensure responsible stewardship of public resources while supporting a vibrant, inclusive local economy.”
Pontes is a nonprofit executive with years of development, operations, budget, management, and strategic planning experience in 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and political organizations. Pontes is currently executive director of NextGen, Chamber of Commerce. NextGen Chamber’s mission is to “empower emerging business leaders by generating insights, encouraging engagement, and nurturing leadership development to shape the future economy.” Prior to that he served as managing director of The Nora Project, and director of development also at The Nora Project. He has held a number of other positions including Major Gifts Officer, Thundermist Health Center, and has worked in both real estate and banking including as Business Solutions Adviser, Ironwood Financial. For three years he was a Selectman, Town of Berkley, Mass. In that role, he managed HR and general governance for town government. There were 200+ staff and 6,500 constituents. He balanced a $20,000,000 budget annually, established an Economic Development Committee, and hired the first town administrator.
Pontes earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth.
Kansas
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
A new Kansas bill requires transgender residents to have their driver’s licenses reflect their sex assigned at birth, invalidating current licenses.
Transgender people across Kansas received letters in the mail on Wednesday demanding the immediate surrender of their driver’s licenses following passage of one of the harshest transgender bathroom bans in the nation. Now the American Civil Liberties Union is filing a lawsuit to block the ban and protect transgender residents from what advocates describe as “sweeping” and “punitive” consequences.
Independent journalist Erin Reed broke the story Wednesday after lawmakers approved House Substitute for Senate Bill 244. In her reporting, Reed included a photo of the letter sent to transgender Kansans, requiring them to obtain a driver’s license that reflects their sex assigned at birth rather than the gender with which they identify.
According to the reporting, transgender Kansans must surrender their driver’s licenses and that their current credentials — regardless of expiration date — will be considered invalid upon the law’s publication. The move effectively nullifies previously issued identification documents, creating immediate uncertainty for those impacted.
House Substitute for Senate Bill 244 also stipulates that any transgender person caught driving without a valid license could face a class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. That potential penalty adds a criminal dimension to what began as an administrative action. It also compounds the legal risks for transgender Kansans, as the state already requires county jails to house inmates according to sex assigned at birth — a policy that advocates say can place transgender detainees at heightened risk.
Beyond identification issues, SB 244 not only bans transgender people from using restrooms that match their gender identity in government buildings — including libraries, courthouses, state parks, hospitals, and interstate rest stops — with the possibility for criminal penalties, but also allows for what critics have described as a “bathroom bounty hunter” provision. The measure permits anyone who encounters a transgender person in a restroom — including potentially in private businesses — to sue them for large sums of money, dramatically expanding the scope of enforcement beyond government authorities.
The lawsuit challenging SB 244 was filed today in the District Court of Douglas County on behalf of anonymous plaintiffs Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Kansas, and Ballard Spahr LLP. The complaint argues that SB 244 violates the Kansas Constitution’s protections for personal autonomy, privacy, equality under the law, due process, and freedom of speech.
Additionally, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a temporary restraining order on behalf of the anonymous plaintiffs, arguing that the order — followed by a temporary injunction — is necessary to prevent the “irreparable harm” that would result from SB 244.
State Rep. Abi Boatman, a Wichita Democrat and the only transgender member of the Kansas Legislature, told the Kansas City Star on Wednesday that “persecution is the point.”
“This legislation is a direct attack on the dignity and humanity of transgender Kansans,” said Monica Bennett, legal director of the ACLU of Kansas. “It undermines our state’s strong constitutional protections against government overreach and persecution.”
“SB 244 is a cruel and craven threat to public safety all in the name of fostering fear, division, and paranoia,” said Harper Seldin, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “The invalidation of state-issued IDs threatens to out transgender people against their will every time they apply for a job, rent an apartment, or interact with police. Taken as a whole, SB 244 is a transparent attempt to deny transgender people autonomy over their own identities and push them out of public life altogether.”
“SB 244 presents a state-sanctioned attack on transgender people aimed at silencing, dehumanizing, and alienating Kansans whose gender identity does not conform to the state legislature’s preferences,” said Heather St. Clair, a Ballard Spahr litigator working on the case. “Ballard Spahr is committed to standing with the ACLU and the plaintiffs in fighting on behalf of transgender Kansans for a remedy against the injustices presented by SB 244, and is dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights jeopardized by this new law.”
National
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Top editorial staff let go last week
Former staff members at the Advocate and Out magazines revealed that parent company Equalpride laid off a number of employees late last week.
Those let go included Advocate editor-in-chief Alex Cooper, Pride.com editor-in-chief Rachel Shatto, brand partnerships manager Erin Manley, community editor Marie-Adélina de la Ferriére, and Out magazine staff writers Moises Mendez and Bernardo Sim, according to a report in Hollywood Reporter.
Cooper, who joined the company in 2021, posted to social media that, “Few people have had the privilege of leading this legendary LGBTQ+ news outlet, and I’m deeply honored to have been one of them. To my team: thank you for the last four years. You’ve been the best. For those also affected today, please let me know how I can support you.”
The Advocate’s PR firm when reached by the Blade said it no longer represents the company. Emails to the Advocate went unanswered.
Equalpride on Friday announced it acquired “Them,” a digital LGBTQ outlet founded in 2017 by Conde Nast.
“Equalpride exists to elevate, celebrate and protect LGBTQ+ storytelling at scale,” Equalpride CEO Mark Berryhill said according to Hollywood Reporter. “By combining the strengths of our brands with this respected digital platform, we’re creating a unified ecosystem that delivers even more impact for our audiences, advertisers, and community partners.”
It’s not clear if “Them” staff would take over editorial responsibilities for the Advocate and Out.
Comings & Goings
Kansas passes bathroom bounty hunter bill
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Spring into sold
New book profiles LGBTQ Ukrainians, documents war experiences
PHOTOS: Queen of Hearts
Two very different views of the State of the Union
Va. activists preparing campaign in support of repealing marriage amendment
