Justice Neil Gorsuch, the archconservative Trump appointee, may end up deciding the future of LGBTQ rights in the workplace. At least, that was the impression that emerged after arguments in three cases the Supreme Court heard on Tuesday, where Gorsuch appeared to be the swing vote. Two of those cases, Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda and Bostock v. Clayton County, ask whether a worker can be fired for […]
“We have textualist arguments in our favor.” Our Senior Attorney and Health Care Strategist @omargp just emerged from #SCOTUS. Watch his take! #RiseUpOctober8 #OurDayInCourt pic.twitter.com/ttQp2KNPP0
— Lambda Legal (@LambdaLegal) October 8, 2019
Our fate likely rests in the hands of Justice Neil Gorsuch. Who should have been Justice Merrick Garland. https://t.co/WmIhSbOq1W
— Brandon Wolf (@bjoewolf) October 8, 2019
The big surprise during today’s arguments on a divided #SCOTUS: Justice Neil Gorsuch sounded open to argument that gay rights should be protected under Titke VII of the ‘64 Civil Rights Act https://t.co/QE15jUyFHx
— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) October 8, 2019
Gorsuch's fear of "massive social upheaval" from LGBTQ rights is a bad legal argument. Does he think Brown v Board of Education was wrongly decided b/c southern whites threw a fit over it? The whole point of civil rights is that the upheaval doesn't matter. https://t.co/B21LAkG2NR
— Pema Levy (@pemalevy) October 8, 2019
So Neil Gorsuch apparently was concerned today about “massive social upheaval” if #SCOTUS rules LGBTQ can’t be fired under Civil Rights Act.
Except, 21+ states have these laws now, including his beloved Colorado, where he was law professor.
There’s been no upheaval.
— Michelangelo Signorile (@MSignorile) October 8, 2019