As the debate surrounding transgender athletes continues, many legal experts are pondering whether or not a previous Supreme Court ruling, Bostock v. Clayton County, could be roadmap on how the highest court may approach protections for LGBTQ+ athletes in the future.
If you need a refresher, Bostock v. Clayton County focused mainly on whether or not the prohibition of sex discrimination, based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, offered protections to gay and transgender workers.
In an unexpected 6-3 decision, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that firing an employee for their sexual orientation or gender identity constitutes unlawful sex discrimination.
“Traditionally, courts and federal agencies look to Title VII to figure out how to interpret sex discrimination,” says Robin Maril, a law professor at Willamette University in Salem, Oregon. Maril believes the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock is deeply relevant to today’s debates over the rights of transgender athletes. But, there are legal experts who aren't so sure about the case's relevancy to today's debate.
Read more on what other legal experts are saying, and why they don't necessarily all agree.
More in Politics:
-
Joe Biden’s approval ratings: Up here, down there and down even more in this area (Deseret News)
-
Opinion: Why are we so afraid of immigrants and refugees? (Deseret News)
-
78% of Republican evangelicals want U.S. declared a Christian nation (The Salt Lake Tribune 🔒)