Free Trial / Sign Up Products / Prices / Samples About Us / Contact FAQs Home
Latest employment law cases 
Summaries and links to full text
LawMemo - First in Employment Law Emailed directly to you
and online all the time
Latest Cases Advanced Search Law Firm Directory Arbitrator Directory Law School Directory Legal Resources / Memos
Employment Law Memo
Arbitration Law Memo
NLRB Law Memo
Employment Low Blog
Arbitration Law Blog
Employment Law 101
Articles
Supreme Court Cases
EEOC Info
NLRB Info

LawMemo Employment Law Blog 
All Archives    |    All Archives By Topic 
Also read LawMemo Arbitration Blog


« Mohawk v. Williams: RICO meets employment law | Main | Ministerial exception: putting churches above the law »

Transsexuals and Title VII
April 03, 2006 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo

Diane (formerly David) Schroer claims the Library of Congress didn't hire her because she is a transsexual. She changed from male to female. Schroer claims the Library violated Title VII by discriminating against her "because of sex."

There are currently three ways to handle such a case:

  1. The tradition view is that Title VII does not forbid discrimination because of transsexuality because that's not discrimination "because of sex."
  2. Recently there has been a theory that such discrimination can come under Title VII because it is "sexual stereotyping" as discussed in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 US 228 (1989), but that's a pretty shaky theory.
  3. A federal district judge in Schroer's suit now says it is possible that a transsexual can show discrimination "because of sex" without relying on sexual stereotyping. The judge denied the employer's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, saying that there are facts that Schroer could prove that would establish discrimination "because of sex." Schroer v. Billington (D DC 03/31/2006)

My view: I've got a fourth theory. Let's reason this by analogy to religion discrimination. If Schroer had changed from being a Catholic to being a Mormon, and the Library had refused to hire her for that reason, then I think that would be a clear-cut case of discrimination "because of religion." Schoer changed from being a man to being a woman, so discrimination on that basis is discrimination "because of sex."

Read more about Schroer v. Billington:

LawMemo.Com


EEOC | NLRB | Supreme CourtEmployment Law BlogArbitration Blog | Employment Law 101

 
Google
 
Web www.LawMemo.com 
This form will search the LawMemo web site. It does not include the Caselaw Database.