Trump v. Gorsuch
How is the media missing this?
It has everything the beltway media usually gets excited about. Trump is setting up a showdown against his own first Supreme Court pick — one of only a tiny group of people he selected but cannot fire. Somehow, news agencies seem unaware of what’s brewing in this battle over employment rights and gender.
I explain in Episode 43 of They Stand Corrected. Find it on all the big players here.
Neil Gorsuch wrote the ruling for the majority in a 2020 decision. The case was Bostock v. Clayton County, GA (side note: that’s not far from where I live, in Atlanta). It’s often referred to by shorthand, “Bostock” (pronounced BAH-stock). Gorsuch cited Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. As I discuss in this episode, that same section applied to my legal case against Time Warner.
Title VII bans discrimination in employment based on certain factors, including gender. Gorsuch wrote:
“Because discrimination on the basis of homosexuality or transgender status requires an employer to intentionally treat individual employees differently because of their sex, an employer who intentionally penalizes an employee for being homosexual or transgender also violates Title VII.”
Trump’s decisions about trans people in the military and in the federal workforce can both run up against this decision, and the legal challenges have already begun. Given this, it’s worth taking a look back at what Trump said about Gorsuch when he announced his first SCOTUS selection. In this episode, you’ll hear all this explained.
Announcement: Former Microsoft CEO and Clippers owner Steve Ballmer saw what a mess government data was, and decided to organize it to help people understand the country better. For a limited time, sign up for the free weekly email from USA Facts using this unique link. Thanks to a paid partnership, you’ll be helping support They Stand Corrected.
Meanwhile…
The media is missing another big piece of the story. Setting aside gender identities, not everyone is biologically male or female. This is something people know when it comes to sports and the Olympics, as I discussed in Episode 19:
And here:
Now, some folks are arguing that certain intersex or non-binary people must not be categorized as women for sports but must be categorized as women for federal employment. Have you seen any media point this out?
Share your thoughts. Paid subscribers: Message me here or write in the comments. Everyone else can find a form at my website.
New episode comes out tomorrow. Be sure to subscribe!
JL