Gerald Lynn Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia
Case Alleging Employment Discrimination Based on Sexual OrientationKey Date: May 30, 2018
Status: Awaiting Review of Supreme Court Petition
Legal Team: Buckley Beal, LLP
Type: Employment Discrimination
Bostock v. Clayon County Case Overview:
Gerald Lynn Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia is a case concerning employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. His legal team contends that his firing is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex discrimination, and which the legal team argues applies to sexual orientation.
The case is especially significant on a national level because it argues, as many courts have ruled in the past, that existing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination based on sex also extend to discrimination based on sexual orientation. Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against people based on their sex – and many litigators over the course of many years have successfully argued that this also protects LGBT people from employment discrimination.
Latest in the Case:
A petition for cert. is now pending before the United States Supreme Court. The petition is being briefed throughout the summer of 2018. It was originally distributed for the September 24, 2018 conference but was rescheduled for a future, unspecified date.
In the meantime, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit formally denied en banc review in the case. Although the court denied review, Judge Robin Rosenbaum issued a strongly worded dissent that took the court to task for its inaction, saying, “I cannot explain why a majority of our Court is content to rely on the precedential equivalent of an Edsel with a missing engine, when it comes to an issue that affects so many people.”
- November 13, 2017: After the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia dismisses Bostock’s case, his legal team petitions for an en banc hearing before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
- May 10, 2018: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals denies Bostock’s petition for an en banc rehearing and affirms the lower court’s dismissal of Bostock’s Title VII claims.
- May 25, 2018: Bostock and his attorneys files a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court.
- July 2, 2018: Response from Zarda party and “friend-of-the-court” briefs are due.
- July 20, 2018: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit denies en banc review in the case. Judge Robin Rosenbaum issues a strongly worded dissent that takes the court to task for its inaction, saying, “I cannot explain why a majority of our Court is content to rely on the precedential equivalent of an Edsel with a missing engine, when it comes to an issue that affects so many people.”
Last Updated October 17, 2018Petition for Writ of Certoriari 11th Circuit Decision