In Glenn v. Brumby, 1:08-CV-023360-RWS (11th Cir., December 6, 2011), the court found that a governmental employer violates the Equal Protection Clause’s prohibition of sex-based discrimination when it terminates an employee because of gender-nonconformity when the employee announces that he or she is planning to transition from one sex to another. The case is significant because it contradicts earlier cases that relied on Congress’s intent in passing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to find that the law only protected against discrimination so that the sexes would be treated equally and did not protect those who were transitioning.
The court adopted reasoning, from more recent decisions of other circuit and lower courts, that discrimination against plaintiffs based on non-conformity with a gender stereotype – by failing to be sufficiently feminine or masculine in appearance and behavior – is Illegal sex or gender discrimination. The Court’s rationale is based on its finding of a congruence between discriminating against transgender and transsexual individuals and discrimination on the basis of gender-based behavioral norms. The Court agreed with the plaintiff that the very acts that define transgender people are those that contradict stereotypes of gender appropriate appearance and behavior.
The case is also significant because the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Court is generally viewed as employer friendly. Instead, the court rejected the employer’s arguments that the law did not protect the plaintiff because transgender and transsexual individuals are not members of a legally protected class under federal law.
To read a copy of the case, click here.
Author(s): Alexander L. Palenzuela-Mauri
