Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia
GPTKB entity
Properties (65)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:caseOutcome |
Affirmed lower court ruling
Employees cannot be fired for being gay or transgender. Impact on the legal framework for discrimination. Interpreted the meaning of sex discrimination. Judicial impact on future discrimination cases. Public demonstrations in support of the ruling. Influenced public policy regarding employment discrimination. Increased_awareness_of_LGBTQ_workplace_rights. Judicial_outcome_recognized_LGBTQ_rights. Raised_public_awareness_of_LGBTQ_issues. Strengthened_protections_for_LGBTQ_employees |
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
Civil rights case
No. 17-1618 Future cases may reference this decision. Called for reforms in workplace policies. Contextualized within civil rights history. Frequently cited in legal discussions. Part of the judicial review process. |
| gptkbp:controversy |
Discrimination based on sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination
|
| gptkbp:court |
5-4 ruling
|
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 15, 2020 |
| gptkbp:firstClaim |
Influenced state-level anti-discrimination laws
|
| gptkbp:hasLegalStatus |
Interpreted Title VII's prohibition of sex discrimination.
|
| gptkbp:historical_analysis |
Examined in legal journals
|
| gptkbp:historicalContext |
Part_of_a_broader_movement_for_LGBTQ_equality
|
| gptkbp:historicalEvent |
Historical_significance_in_the_fight_for_LGBTQ_rights.
|
| gptkbp:homeGround |
Bostock_was_fired_for_participating_in_a_gay_softball_league.
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Expanded interpretation of civil rights protections
|
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:Roberts_Court
gptkb:Justice_Samuel_Alito Alito, Thomas Reviewed_by_the_Supreme_Court |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
gptkb:Lambda_Legal
Employment discrimination based on sexual orientation Set a precedent for future discrimination cases LGBTQ rights in the workplace Clarified_scope_of_Title_VII_protections |
| gptkbp:mediaCoverage |
Extensive coverage in national media
|
| gptkbp:notableEvent |
gptkb:Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
|
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
590 U.S. ___ (2020)
Oral arguments presented by both sides. Resolved issues of employment discrimination. Significant for civil rights jurisprudence. Landmark_decision_for_LGBTQ_rights |
| gptkbp:outcome |
Title_VII_of_the_Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964_protects_employees_from_discrimination_based_on_sexual_orientation
|
| gptkbp:politicalParty |
gptkb:Justice_Neil_Gorsuch
Gorsuch,_Roberts,_Kavanaugh,_Breyer,_Sotomayor |
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:Price_Waterhouse_v._Hopkins
Sexual orientation is protected under federal law |
| gptkbp:publicAccess |
Statements from advocacy groups
Widespread_support_for_LGBTQ_rights |
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
R.G._&_G.R._Harris_Funeral_Homes_Inc._v._EEOC
Altitude_Express,_Inc._v._Zarda |
| gptkbp:respondsTo |
gptkb:Clayton_County,_Georgia
|
| gptkbp:signatories |
gptkb:Gerald_Bostock
|
| gptkbp:soundtrack |
October 8, 2019
|
| gptkbp:team |
Analyzed in various legal contexts.
Established judicial precedent for future cases. Implications for employers and employees. Ongoing debates about the implications of the ruling. Legal_outcome_favored_LGBTQ_rights. Part_of_the_evolving_legal_framework_for_LGBTQ_rights. |