I don’t feel like the article provided enough information to make a judgement on the validity of this. Just having seniority or a college degree doesn’t automatically make you the better candidate. I am suspicious of this during pride though…
deleted by creator
Thank you for an informative and insightful comment.
That’s surprising.
This Supreme Court doing something to support equality and not stifle it instead? Oh, wait—it’s probably just a happy accident that them dismissing the idea that discrimination requires privilege lines up with their quest to make sure the “right people” hurt.
Thank you for the clarification and useful explanation. She should be able to go to court to have her case heard. That does make sense and is a genuine step towards equality.
According to the article, she wasn’t just passed over for a promotion, she was also actively demoted, both times for someone LGBTQ+.
“Not long after denying her the new position, her supervisors removed her from her existing job, telling her that they had concerns about her leadership and offering her a demotion that came with a substantial pay cut. She was replaced by a gay man with less seniority.”
The trick for her will be proving it was discriminatory and not for other reasons.
I would bet she was passed over for the promotion because of her attitude, because you have to be an awful person to sue for this.
deleted by creator
The white part doesn’t even matter. This is just an awful person blaming DEI for their failures.
deleted by creator
I know the white part doesn’t matter because the actual suit is for being straight alone. The justices (unnecessarily) added the discussion of race.
I know the suit is an attack on DEI because it made it to the Supreme court. It takes years and tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars to maintain a court case. Private individuals usually can’t afford this. The client, who works for the Ohio Department of Youth services, certainly couldn’t. Most SC cases are funded by special interest groups looking to push a particular change in the law. Trump and the Conservatives have made it very clear that they are against DEI because it makes it harder to discriminate against minorities. This decision weakens the protections for those groups.
I know she’s awful because no decent person would bring such an obviously bigoted suit.
deleted by creator
Jesus Christ, please read what I wrote again because you obviously failed to understand what I was explaining.
Not just any case gets before the SC. They choose cases for a reason, usually because it involves an aspect of the law they wish to clarify or (increasingly commonly) overturn. Special interest groups shop around for cases that they can find a defense for to make the political changes they want (for example Masterpiece Cakeshop v Colorado was funded by Alliance Defending Freedom). As you said this case began in 2017. There is NO WAY a middle manager at a state agency can afford to pay some of the best lawyers in the country for 8 years. She’s not some secret billionaire. Yes, her funding is unknown but that’s exactly why it is relevant. Dark money groups pushing political agendas are manipulating the justice system.
This woman is just a convenient tool to weaken minority protections. Previous SC precedent from 1973 holds that Title VII cases consider a history of discrimination of groups in question when determining how much evidence is required to prove the case. There is no history of straight discrimination but there is significant past history and current LGBT discrimination. It makes NO SENSE to treat these events as equally probably but that is exactly what overturning this decision does.
This strips protections for LGBT, black, disabled people, non-Christians, and other protected minority groups. Now to prove they are discriminated against, they cannot rely on the well-proven precedent of this fact. This makes discrimination against these groups easier which of course is the point of all this anti-DEI stuff. It is Christian white supremacy in action.
deleted by creator
Far be it from me to cast aspersions based on appearances, but she looks like the most Karen who ever Karened. The Uberkaren. That may have been at play.
She may be a perfectly nice individual, but getting to the Supreme Court is the ultimate “I want to speak to your manager!” move.
