‘A Transformative Ruling for Equal Rights’.
On June 15, the Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in banning workplace discrimination “because of … sex,” includes sexual orientation and gender identity/presentation—the first time that the Supreme Court has ruled that anti-LGBTQ discrimination is discrimination on the basis of sex, and the first time it has ruled in favor of protections for transgender people.
The ruling is a victory for the plaintiffs, including Aimee Stephens, who was fired from her job at a funeral home after coming out as transgender, and who died a month before the Court issued its decision. It is a victory for LGBTQ employees across the country—most states have no laws protecting them from workplace discrimination.
But the implications of the decision go far beyond employment, says Julia Raifman, assistant professor of health law, policy & management at the School of Public Health.
“This is a transformative ruling for equal rights in the United States,” she says.
Raifman discussed the ruling and what it means for the rights, health, and wellbeing of the LGBTQ community in the United States.
What, fundamentally, does this ruling mean for LGBTQ people in the US?
In many ways it is remarkable that the United States today has any population of people with rights that are explicitly unequal.
In this case, LGBTQ people did not have equal rights to employment, and still do not have equal rights to health care, housing, or public accommodations.
This ruling sets the stage for that to change.
How else do you expect this ruling to affect LGBTQ people’s lives?
Our research has shown that unequal rights are associated with broad increases in mental distress and suicidality among the population affected by unequal rights, not just those who directly experience discrimination.
For example, state laws permitting the denial of services to same-sex couples because of religious or moral beliefs—sometimes called “religious refusal laws”—were associated with a 46-percent increase in the proportion of sexual minority adults experiencing mental distress.
If this ruling portends fully equal rights for LGBTQ people, I expect we may see reductions in the large disparities in mental distress and suicide by sexual orientation and gender identity—which are particularly severe for teens.
The implications of the decision will directly benefit not just individuals who would have been fired for being LGBTQ or would be concerned about being fired for being LGBTQ, but all LGBTQ people whose country considers them equal people, deserving of equal rights.
The ruling comes days after the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) scrapped healthcare nondiscrimination protections for transgender people. What could this ruling mean for the HHS policy?
The new Supreme Court decision considers discrimination against people because they are LGBTQ as discrimination on the basis of sex. Because the Affordable Care Act explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, it is likely that the new HHS policy permitting discrimination on the basis of sex will not stand.