Call it the law of unintended consequences.
While Congress might not have meant to include gays, lesbians and transgender employees in the Civil Rights Act of 1964—a half-century later the Supreme Court ruled it does indeed apply.
Justices John Roberts and Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s more liberal judges in noting sex and sexual orientation “plays a necessary and undisguisable role” in cases of workplace discrimination, resulting in a 6-3 decision.
“We do not hesitate to recognize today a necessary consequence of that legislative choice: An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender defies the law,” Gorsuch wrote for the majority.
Noting framers of the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result, he added that “Likely, they weren’t thinking about many of the Act’s consequences that have become apparent over the years, including its prohibition against discrimination on the basis of motherhood or its ban on the sexual harassment of male employees.”
However, “the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands,” Gorsuch continued. “When the express terms of a statute give us one answer and extratextual considerations suggest another, it’s no contest. Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit.”
Strong dissent
Conservative justices Kavanaugh, Alito and Thomas dissented, with Alito tersely claiming, “a more brazen abuse of our authority to interpret statutes is hard to recall.”
“There is only one word for what the Court has done today: legislation,” Alito wrote, and was joined by Thomas.
Kavanaugh, in a separate dissent, argued that while Title VII protection is deserved, it is the job of Congress, and not the courts, to amend it to include LGBT employees.
Yet he applauded the advancements gay and lesbians have made.
“They have exhibited extraordinary vision, tenacity, and grit — battling often steep odds in the legislative and judicial arenas, not to mention in their daily lives. They have advanced powerful policy arguments and can take pride in today’s result.”