Showing posts with label LGBT rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LGBT rights. Show all posts

Friday, July 18, 2014

Suit Against Catholic Diocese By Fired Lesbian Food Bank Manager Alleges Fraud

Kansas City Star reported yesterday on a lawsuit filed by a Kansas City (MO) woman who says she was fired from her position as a pastoral associate managing a food bank for St. Francis Xavier Catholic parish after her same-sex marital relationship was mentioned in a newspaper article.  Plaintiff Colleen Simon says that priests at the parish knew of her marriage to Rev. Donna Simon, a Lutheran minister, and had no problem with it. However it is alleged that when the relationship was publicly mentioned in an article about an area of Kansas City, Bishop Robert Finn ordered her fired.  The state court lawsuit against the Diocese and Finn claims that the diocese fraudulently encouraged her to take the food bank position knowing that it had no intention of keeping its commitments to her.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Religious- Civil Rights Groups Urge Obama To Exclude Religious Exemption In Planned LGBT Order

Following on a similar letter from constitutional law scholars earlier this week, yesterday a coalition of 69 religious and civil rights organizations sent a letter (full text) to President Obama urging him to reject calls for a religious exemption in his planned executive order to bar LGBT discrimination by federal contractors. The letter argues, in part:
Religious freedom is one of our most cherished values, a fundamental and defining feature of our national character. It guarantees us the freedom to hold any belief we choose and the right to act on our religious beliefs within certain limits. It does not, however, provide organizations the right to discriminate using taxpayer dollars. When a religiously affiliated organization makes the decision to request a taxpayer-funded contract with the federal government, it must play by the same rules as every other federal contractor.
[Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.] 

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Religious College That Expelled Transgender Student Not Covered By Unruh Act

In Cabading v. California Baptist University, (CA Super. Ct., July 11, 2014), a California trial court held that a private religious college did not violate California's Unruh Civil Rights Act when it expelled Domainlor Javier Cabading, a pre-operative male-to-female transgender person who had been admitted to the school on a merit scholarship. The University claimed Cabading committed fraud by applying for admission as a female. The court held that the private Southern Baptist school is not a "business establishment", and so is not covered by the state anti-discrimination law. However the school's ancillary programs that are open to the public-- its library, counseling center, and retail businesses such as restaurants operating on school property-- are "business establishments" covered by the Act. The court awarded plaintiff $4000 in damages for her exclusion from these programs. The Riverside County Press-Enterprise reports that the school is considering appealing the portion of the decision that went against it. MSNBC and Transgender Workplace Law & Diversity blog also report on the decision.

Constitutional Law Profs Oppose Religious Exemption In Obama's Planned LGBT Non-Discrimination Executive Order

Yesterday 54 faculty members from top law schools around the country sent a letter (full text) to President Obama opposing the call earlier this month by faith leaders for a broad religious exemption in the President's planned executive order on LGBT discrimination by federal contractors. (See prior posting.) The law professors' joint letter reads in part:
As scholars of religious liberty and constitutional rights, we write to urge you to refrain from including religious exemption language in any executive order providing nondiscrimination guarantees for LGBT employees of federal contractors. Contrary to the counsel you have received from others, such an exemption is not required by the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), or accommodations of religious liberty in other federal non-discrimination laws, including Title VII. Indeed, the proposed exemption would be unprecedented. Including such a provision in newly expanded rights for LGBT employees of federal contractors would at once undermine workplace equity for LGBT employees, relegate LGBT protections to a lesser status than existing prohibitions against discrimination, and allow religious employers to create or maintain discriminatory workplaces with substantial public funding.
According to a press release, the scholars' letter was spearheaded by Columbia Law School's new Public Rights/ Private Conscience Project.

Sunday, July 13, 2014

Christian College Gets Title IX Religious Exemption For Housing Of Transgender Students

George Fox University, a Christian University with Quaker roots, reports that on May 23 the U.S. Department of Education granted it a religious exemption from the Title IX Education Amendments of 1972 relating to non-discrimination in housing and facilities. The Oregon-based school says it applied for the exemption "to preserve its right to draw on its religious convictions to handle situations related to students experiencing gender identity issues."  It adds that other colleges have received similar exemptions in the past.

The facts need to be pieced together from the University's posting, an article last Friday in PQ Monthly and an earlier report by PQ Monthly.  Apparently an African-American transgender student, who is entering his junior year, was living in female-only campus housing when the student began the medical, social and legal gender transition.  Last April the student, "Jayce M." requested to move from female-only on-campus housing to male-only on-campus housing. The University denied the request, but presented the option of living off campus with other males (conditioned on completing name and gender changes on his driver's license and Social Security records) or living on campus in a single room.

As Jayce M prepared to appeal the school's denial of male on-campus housing to the Department of Education as a violation of Title IX's anti-discrimination provisions, the school applied for the Title IX exemption and was granted it in an unusually speedy two-months. On the basis of the newly-granted exemption the Department of Education earlier this month closed Jayce M's appeal. His lawyer says that they now plan to appeal the Department of Education's ruling.

Thursday, July 10, 2014

LGBT Rights Groups Withdraw Support For ENDA Over Religious Exemptions

US News reported yesterday that a number of LGBT and civil rights groups have decided to withdraw their support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act  (ENDA), now believing that the religious exemption in the version that has passed the Senate (S. 815) is too broad. The shift in attitude has been prompted by increased assertion of religious beliefs as a basis for discriminating against gays and lesbians. Among the groups withdrawing their support are the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the ACLU, Lambda Legal, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and the Transgender Law Center.

Thursday, July 03, 2014

Faith Leaders Ask Obama To Include Religious Exemption In Planned LGBT Non-Discrimination Executive Order

In remarks (full text) at a June 30 White House reception celebrating LGBT Pride Month, President Obama announced that he has directed his staff to prepare two executive orders.  One will prohibit discrimination by federal contractors on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Another will expand the sexual orientation non-discrimination provisions applicable to federal employees to also include gender identity.

Meanwhile the Washington Post reports on a July 1 letter (full text) sent to the President by 14 clergy and faith-based organization leaders asking the President to include a religious exemption in any executive order on federal contractors and LGBT employment policy. The letter reads in part:
Without a robust religious exemption,, like the provisions in the Senate-passed ENDA, this expansion of hiring rights will come at an unreasonable cost to the common good, national unity and religious freedom....
While the nation has undergone incredible legal and social change over the last decade, we still live in a nation with different beliefs about sexuality. We must find a way to respect diversity of opinion on this issue in a way that respects the dignity of all parties to the best of our ability.... [A] religious exemption would simply maintain that religious organizations will not be automatically disqualified or disadvantaged in obtaining contracts because of their religious beliefs.

Thursday, June 26, 2014

9th Circuit Denies En Banc Review On Strict Scrutiny For Sexual Orientation Classifications

Earlier this week, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to grant en banc review to an earlier decision by a 3-judge panel that concluded heightened scrutiny must be applied to equal protection claims based on sexual orientation. In SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Laboratories(9th Cir., June 24, 2014), the court reported that the call for en banc review did not receive a majority vote.  However Judge O'Scannlain, joined by Judges Bybee and Bee, filed a dissent to the refusal to review, saying in part:
This case ... came to our court in the posture of an appeal from a simple juror selection ruling during trial. Sadly, it has morphed into a constitutional essay about equal protection and sexual orientation.... The opinion’s unprecedented application of heightened scrutiny to a peremptory strike of a juror who was perceived to be gay bears significant implications for the same-sex marriage debate and for other laws that may give rise to distinctions based on sexual orientation.
Indeed, today’s opinion is the only appellate decision since United States v. Windsor ... to hold that lower courts are “required by Windsor to apply heightened scrutiny to classifications based on sexual orientation for purposes of equal protection.” ... Such holding is wrong, egregiously so. Because of the danger that district courts will be misled by the opinion’s sweeping misinterpretation of Windsor, it is most unfortunate that we denied rehearing en banc.
SCOTUS Blog has more on the decision.

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

White House Hosts Global LGBT Human Rights Forum

The White House yesterday hosted the first Global Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Human Rights Forum. It brought together religious leaders along with LGBT and HIV activists, human rights advocates and the private sector. A Fact Sheet issued by the White House reviews the international initiatives that the government has taken to protect LGBT rights. National Security Advisor Susan Rice addressed the Forum. (Full text of remarks.) Asserting that "cultural differences do not excuse human rights violations," Rice later asked: "For the faith community, how can we reinforce to religious groups that God loves all the children of his creation equally?"