最高法院应该保护LGBTQ工人。 但是会吗？
Robert Volk discusses three Supreme Court cases that will test the borders of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act in this POV for 但是今天.
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court announced that it would review three cases that could decide whether the ban on discrimination based on sex in 第七条 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. 虽然结果不确定，但法院应该从更广泛的角度看待第七章所包含的保护，并认为该法案禁止基于性取向和性别认同的歧视。 如果做不到这一点，争取平等权利的斗争就会倒退，并进一步削弱公众对法院维护所有美国人权利的能力的信任。
第七章禁止基于种族、肤色、宗教、性别或国籍的就业歧视。 在最初颁布后的许多年里，法院拒绝将第七章禁止基于性别的歧视扩展到基于个人性取向或性别认同的歧视。 In 2017, however, in 海弗利诉常春藤科技社区学院案, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that sexual orientation discrimination is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by 第七条. In reaching its decision, the seventh circuit relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in 普华永道诉霍普金斯案. 在那起案件中，最高法院裁定，一名被建议“化妆、做发型、戴首饰”的女雇员遭受了性别歧视，违反了第七章。 在这样做时，最高法院认为性别定型观念违反了第七章禁止基于性别的歧视的规定。 The seventh circuit applied that reasoning to sexual orientation–based discrimination, stating that the plaintiff in 蜂巢 “represents the ultimate case of failure to conform to the female stereotype…: she is not heterosexual.”
The seventh circuit also looked to 爱的诉Virginia, the Supreme Court case striking down laws prohibiting interracial marriage. In 爱的, the Supreme Court held that Virginia’s law banning interracial marriage violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection clause because of its denial of an individual’s right to associate with another person because of that person’s race. 同样，第七巡回法院认为，基于雇员想要交往的人的性别而歧视雇员，构成了违反第七章的基于性别的歧视。
Moreover, in r.g.r.哈里斯殡仪馆诉平等就业机会委员会案, a 2018 case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that 第七条 prohibits discrimination based on gender identity. 在一起涉及跨性别雇员的案件中，法院发现，基于跨性别身份的歧视是基于“性别刻板印象”的歧视。 法院还发现，基于员工变性身份的歧视“至少部分是由员工的性别引起的”。
