Bostock v. Clayton County

E31059

Title VII case United States Supreme Court case employment discrimination case landmark decision

Bostock v. Clayton County is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held federal employment discrimination law protects employees from being fired for being gay or transgender.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

All labels observed (3)

Label	Occurrences
Bostock v. Clayton County canonical	6
Bostock v. Clayton County (interpretive influence on sex discrimination	1
Gerald Lynn Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia	1

Statements (49)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	Title VII case ⓘ United States Supreme Court case ⓘ employment discrimination case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ
areaOfLaw	civil rights law ⓘ employment discrimination law ⓘ
argumentDate	2019-10-08 ⓘ
citation	590 U.S. ___ (2020) ⓘ
consolidatedWith	Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda ⓘ R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ⓘ
constitutionalProvisionNotAtIssue	Equal Protection Clause ⓘ
country	United States of America ⓘ surface form: United States
court	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	2020-06-15 ⓘ
dissentingOpinionBy	Brett M. Kavanaugh ⓘ Samuel A. Alito Jr. ⓘ
dissentJoinedBy	Clarence Thomas ⓘ
docketNumber	17-1618 ⓘ
employmentContext	private sector employment ⓘ public sector employment ⓘ
fullCaseName	Bostock v. Clayton County self-linksurface differs ⓘ surface form: Gerald Lynn Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia
holding	Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ⓘ surface form: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from firing individuals for being homosexual Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from firing individuals for being transgender ⓘ
impact	extended federal employment protections to LGBTQ employees nationwide ⓘ
jurisdiction	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
keyword	LGBTQ rights ⓘ gender identity discrimination ⓘ sexual orientation discrimination ⓘ
legalIssue	scope of Title VII prohibition on discrimination "because of sex" ⓘ
legalPrinciple	discrimination against homosexual or transgender employees is discrimination because of sex under Title VII ⓘ
locationOfCourt	Washington, D.C. ⓘ
lowerCourt	United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ⓘ
majorityJoinedBy	Elena Kagan ⓘ John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Sonia Sotomayor ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Neil M. Gorsuch ⓘ surface form: Neil Gorsuch
originatingCourt	United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ⓘ
petitioner	Gerald Lynn Bostock ⓘ
relatedCase	Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda ⓘ R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ⓘ
respondent	Clayton County, Georgia ⓘ
result	reversed and remanded ⓘ
statuteInterpreted	Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ⓘ
subjectMatter	workplace discrimination based on gender identity ⓘ workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation ⓘ
term	October Term 2019 ⓘ
vote	6–3 ⓘ

Referenced by (8)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 → landmarkCase → Bostock v. Clayton County ⓘ

Title IX → notableCase → Bostock v. Clayton County ⓘ

this entity surface form: Bostock v. Clayton County (interpretive influence on sex discrimination

Bostock v. Clayton County → fullCaseName → Bostock v. Clayton County self-linksurface differs ⓘ

this entity surface form: Gerald Lynn Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia

Gerald Lynn Bostock → notableFor → Bostock v. Clayton County ⓘ

Gerald Lynn Bostock → partyTo → Bostock v. Clayton County ⓘ

Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda → relatedCase → Bostock v. Clayton County ⓘ

Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda → consolidatedWith → Bostock v. Clayton County ⓘ

R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission → consolidatedWith → Bostock v. Clayton County ⓘ