Advocates of religious schools say the decision of the Supreme Court on Monday to the rule that discrimination in employment on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity is illegal under federal law raises questions and concerns unanswered for them.

On 6-to-3 ruling held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on grounds of sex, by extension protects homosexuals and transgender individuals from being fired for reasons related to their orientation or gender identity.

"an employer who dismisses an individual for being gay or transgender fire that person for traits or actions that have not been questioned in the members of a different sex," says the report, which was written by Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was appointed by President of Trump. "Sex plays a necessary and undeniable role in deciding exactly what title VII prohibits."

Twenty-two states, plus the District of Columbia, already have laws that prohibit employers from discriminating against employees on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Some in higher education praised the ruling. Peter McPherson, president of the Association of State Universities and Land Grant issued a statement applauding "this breakthrough milestone for human rights." Lily Eskelsen Garcia, the president of the National Education Association, a labor organization that includes K-12 teachers and university faculty among its members, similarly praised the decision as a significant step towards LGBT equality. "The message is clear and simple :. educators and students Our LGBTQ issue endpoint," said

However, some religious schools considered the ruling with concern

Some religious universities .. have rules against hiring employees see LGBT and sexual activity outside the bounds of marriage between a man and a woman as grounds for termination. Advocates of religious schools see their ability to consider sexual orientation and gender identity in employment decisions as a matter of religious freedom, and worry that opening a new front for people to sue religious schools about their LGBTQ policies on employees under federal law against discrimination will become more vulnerable to lawsuits.

religious schools would not be defenseless in such lawsuits. Title VII includes an exemption for religious employers, including religious schools, giving them the right to give priority to members of their own religion in hiring, and there are other legal channels established through which universities can seek exemptions from the federal and state laws against discrimination. None of the employers whose cases went before the Supreme Court affirmed religious exemptions - one employer, a funeral, he unsuccessfully pursued a defense on the grounds of religious freedom, but had not requested the review of your claim religious freedom by the Tribunal Supremo - Gorsuch and wrote that future cases would have to take up questions concerning the applicability of those exceptions

Gorsuch wrote that "concerns about how Title VII intersect with religious liberties are nothing new" and he cited. the "express legal exception for religious organizations" written in Title VII. "This court has also recognized that the First Amendment may prevent enforcement empleo'a discrimination claims concerning the employment relationship between a religious institution and its ministers, '" he wrote. "And Congress has taken a step yet in the Law of Religious Freedom Restoration 1993 ... That statute prohibits the federal government substantially burdening the exercise of religion of a person unless he proves that doing so both Boosts imperative public interest and is the least restrictive means of promoting that interest. "

'But how these doctrines that protect religious freedom interact with Title VII are questions for future cases too, "Gorsuch wrote.

The Council of Christian Colleges and Universities, along with the Catholic University of America, a Roman Catholic institution, and Brigham Young University, an institution affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, presented an amicus in the case, arguing that the ban on Title VII sex discrimination should not be interpreted to include discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Religious schools argued in the letter that "repeatedly alter the meaning of Title VII would have a negative impact on faith-based institutions of higher education significantly and far-reaching." They argued that Congress, not the Supreme Court, "is more appropriate to address the issues of LGBT rights in employment, protecting the same time the capacity of educational institutions religious to go forward with their unique religious missions."

The amicus acknowledges the exceptions that apply to religious universities, but said the scope of exceptions "is dispute between the lower courts." Schools argued, "Any uncertainty associated with the implementation of these legal exceptions to complaints of sex discrimination would be even greater if a religious university had to rely on a legal exemption to protect their religious rules against discrimination lawsuit LGBTQ."

"particular concerns are how this new clear statement of civil rights for LGBTQ people will intersect with clear Title VII religious protections," said Shirley Hoogstra, president of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities.

Under Title VII, "religious organizations are permitted to give employment preference to members of their own religion," continued Hoogstra. "Will that include beliefs that religion? For example, let's say if you are Jewish, Muslim, Christian - if you believe counterculturally that marriage is between a man and a woman and prefers to hire people who share that religious belief as their faculty and staff, will be able to do that in the employment context? We would like to say yes. That was the purpose of religious protections. It is really to allow the belief that is practiced in a way without restrictions. But it is possible that would be challenged. "

John Garvey, president of the Catholic University of America, said the impact of the decision" remains to be seen. When we wrote the brief, our concern is that there are any number of ways this can affect us not only in Title VII, but also under Title IX "of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, which prohibits discrimination based on sex in educational institutions. The questions posed written about the potential impacts on the deck of the student, for example. (A less an expert in Title IX expects the decision of the Supreme Court will lead to an increase in court cases challenging schools on policies related to separate gender by being facilities and sports teams.) < p> "people who signed the brief in several Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, LDS, evangelical schools, all are quite serious about the way they run their universities," Garvey said. "It's a matter of educating young men and women to live their lives in a certain way, and we do not like being hypocritical in doing that. So we take seriously the fact that marriage is a sacrament administered to men and women and not others, and we take very seriously the idea that God created men and women and the sexes separated and that it is part of the natural order of things. "

Greg Nevins, director of the Project Employment Equity and senior advisor Lambda Legal, a non-profit organization that advocates for LGBTQ civil rights, said it is surprising that much of the opposition to play Title VII to include protections LGBTQ came from religious institutions in the light of the fact that the exemptions requested religiously were not at stake in the specific cases before the Supreme Court.

"The decision seems to affect less than many other employers only in terms of exemptions that already exists in the law," Nevins said. "They have a lot of arrows in the quiver, but it's a matter of figuring out which one is right -. Or maybe, if none of them is, they have to comply with the law like everyone else "

Image of How to find a teaching job in Universities in China
Rate and Comment
Image of Secretary DeVos Approves 10 Additional Perkins Career and Technical Education Plans
Secretary DeVos Approves 10 Additional Perkins Career and Technical Education Plans

Secretary DeVos approves 10 Perkins Career Plans and Technical Education detail Plans how additional states and DC will use federal investment to pr

Read more →

img of

A Lawyer of foreign hiring in China, is the CEO and Founder of Teaching China.net, a teacher employment and service provider firm that helps teachers get closer to their employers and win at securing a safe and valued teaching position in China.

Login

 

Register

 
Already have an account? Login here
loader

contact us