Relying on rulings from the Second, Sixth, and Seventh Circuit Courts of Appeal, the district court found that Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation or transgender status. After filing a charge of discrimination with the EEOC, Wittmer sued Phillips 66 in a Texas federal district court. Although Phillips 66 was unaware that Wittmer was transgender at the time, she sent the company a letter accusing it of transgender discrimination. Phillips 66 interviewed Wittmer and made her a job offer contingent on passing a background check, but it decided to rescind the offer after discovering that Wittmer misrepresented a recent employment termination. The case involved Nicole Wittmer, a transgender woman who applied for an engineer position with Phillips 66. 6, 2019), reaffirmed a 40-year-old holding that Title VII does not prohibit employers from discriminating against employees because of sexual orientation. On February 6, 2019, the Fifth Circuit in Wittmer v. Recently a few other circuits have held otherwise. Like most jurisdictions, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (which oversees federal courts in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas) has construed Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so as not to provide employment protections based on sexual orientation. In light of the Supreme Court’s decision, the case discussed in this article, Wittmer v. To learn more about that decision, please visit. Clayton County, Georgia that Title VII protects employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation 140 S. Following this publication, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. To schedule an engagement with America First Legal, please email. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Court here. Attorney General Paxton and Attorney General Schmitt have delivered a victory for the rule of law, and it is now imperative that the Administration acts in good faith to follow the law,” Gene Hamilton said. Last night’s decision from the Fifth Circuit is an outright and total evisceration of the Biden Administration’s lawless attempts to undue that progress in the border environment. In pursuit of a reckless, ideologically-driven open-borders agenda, the Biden Administration has systematically moved to undermine all of the progress made during the Trump Administration. But it wasn’t until President Trump’s Administration that meaningful steps were taken to deliver on such a fundamental duty, including through the use of longstanding statutes such as the one recognizing and directing the use of MPP. “ For decades, the American people have rightly demanded that their government defend our national sovereignty and secure our borders. Statement from America First Legal Vice-President and General Counsel, Gene Hamilton: Now, the Biden Administration- which has shown nothing but seething contempt for the laws of the United States - must be made to at long last comply with the injunction,” Stephen Miller said. I was honored to consult with the State of Texas on this landmark case. “ I salute Attorney General Paxton and Attorney General Schmitt for this historic win on behalf of American sovereignty and the American citizenry. Statement from America First Legal President, Stephen Miller: The Fifth Circuit’s decision in this case, which resoundingly rejected so many of these efforts to dismantle our national sovereignty and duly-enacted laws passed by Congress, should be mandatory reading for every employee of the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, State, and every White House employee who works on immigration issues.Īmerica First Legal applauds the State of Texas and the State of Missouri for their work against the Biden Administration’s malicious assault on our Southern border. The Biden Administration has radically turbocharged efforts that have been underway from open-borders advocates for decades, with its efforts to terminate MPP being just one example. Throughout its meticulous, 117-page decision, the Fifth Circuit rightly rejected the Biden Administration’s attempts to knowingly abandon its duties to follow federal law in the border environment. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a decision delivering a resounding defeat for the Biden Administration, which had unlawfully attempted to terminate the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP).
0 kommentar(er)
