Op-Ed: It is unlawful to discriminate ‘because of sex.’ But exactly what does which actually suggest?

Op-Ed: It is unlawful to discriminate ‘because of sex.’ But exactly what does which actually suggest?

The Department of Justice the other day tossed along the gauntlet in new york, filing a lawsuit alleging that their state violated federal anti-discrimination laws and regulations by limiting trans people’ usage of restrooms in local government structures. Some of those federal regulations, Title VII of this 1964 Civil Rights Act, forbids employment discrimination as a result of competition, color, nationwide beginning, faith – and intercourse. DOJ says that new york has involved in intercourse discrimination, because, in DOJ’s view, “sex” includes “gender identity.”

The government’s interpretation of this word — “sex” — has broadened notably since Title VII’s passage. Certainly, the Equal Employment chance Commission, the federal agency developed by Title VII and vested with main enforcement authority for the statute, initially comprehended “because of intercourse” to mean no more than overt drawbacks to feamales in benefit of males, and revealed no curiosity about enforcing the supply at all. Continue reading “Op-Ed: It is unlawful to discriminate ‘because of sex.’ But exactly what does which actually suggest?”