Gerald Lynn Bostock, Petitioner v. Clayton County, Georgia ; Altitude Express, Inc., Petitioners v. Melissa…

Summary

The Supreme Court held that an employer who fires an individual merely for being homosexual or transgender violates Title VII's prohibition on discrimination 'because of sex,' reading the statute's terms according to their ordinary public meaning at enactment: 'because of' imports but-for causation, 'discriminate against' means intentionally treating an individual worse, and the statute protects individuals rather than groups. Because homosexuality and transgender status are inextricably bound up with sex, an employer cannot discriminate on those grounds without intentionally treating employees differently because of their sex, and the employers' appeals to expected applications, legislative history, and policy could not displace the law's plain terms. The Court affirmed the Second and Sixth Circuit judgments in the Zarda and Harris Funeral Homes cases and reversed the Eleventh Circuit judgment in Bostock, remanding that case. Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas, dissented, arguing the Court usurped the legislative role by effectively rewriting Title VII; Justice Kavanaugh dissented on separation-of-powers and ordinary-meaning grounds, contending that the ordinary meaning of the phrase 'discriminate because of sex' excludes sexual orientation discrimination and that Congress must amend the statute.