Connect with us

BREAKING: Jeff Sessions Rescinds Obama-Era Government Policy That Protects Transgender Workers From Discrimination

Published

on

DOJ Proves It Does Not Support LGBT Civil Rights or Even Understand Them

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has rescinded an Obama-era government policy that stated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects transgender people in the workplace from discrimination.

In 2014 then-Attorney General Eric Holder issued a memo stating: “I have determined that the best reading of Title VII’s prohibition of sex discrimination is that it encompasses discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status. The most straightforward reading of Title VII is that discrimination ‘because of … sex’ includes discrimination because an employee’s gender identification is as a member of a particular sex, or because the employee is transitioning, or has transitioned, to another sex.”

As Buzzfeed News’ Dominic Holden first reported, Sessions on Wednesday rescinded that government policy.

“Although federal law, including Title VII, provides various protections to transgender individuals, Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on gender identity per se,” the Sessions memo reads. “This is a conclusion of law, not policy…As a law enforcement agency, the Department of Justice must interpret Title VII as written by Congress.”

As Holden points out, “the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, an independent agency that enforces civil rights law in the workplace, and a growing body of federal court decisions have found sex discrimination does include discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sex stereotyping — and that Title VII therefore bans anti-transgender discrimination as well.”

The Sessions memo also states: “The Justice Department must and will continue to affirm the dignity of all people, including transgender individuals. Nothing in this memorandum should be construed to condone mistreatment on the basis of gender identity, or to express a policy view on whether Congress should amend Title VII to provide different or additional protections.”

As Attorney General, Sessions has wide latitude to interpret federal laws and decide how they should be enforced. For example, both Attorney General Holder and President Barack Obama came to the conclusion that DOMA, the 1996 law that prohibited the federal government from recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples, was unconstitutional. They refused to defend the law in court. 

Proving the Dept. of Justice under Attorney General Sessions has no desire to support or even understand LGBT civil rights, a DOZJ spokesperson explained to Buzzfeed its reasoning for rescinding the 2014 memo protecting transgender workers.

“The Department of Justice cannot expand the law beyond what Congress has provided,” the DOJ’s Devin O’Malley told Buzzfeed. “Unfortunately, the last administration abandoned that fundamental principle, which necessitated today’s action. This Department remains committed to protecting the civil and constitutional rights of all individuals, and will continue to enforce the numerous laws that Congress has enacted that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

Gender identity is different from sexual orientation. So, the DOJ explanation has nothing to do with protecting transgender people.

UPDATE:
ThinkProgress has a copy of the full memo.

To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page.

If you find NCRM valuable, would you please consider making a donation to support our independent journalism?

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘I Can’t Imagine a Better Turnout Engine’: CNN Conservative Warns GOP About Roe Ruling Blowback

Published

on

On CNN Saturday afternoon, conservative commentator S.E. Cupp insisted the Supreme Court ruling dismantling Roe v Wade after 50 years of allowing women to make choices about their reproductive freedom no matter where they live, will come back the haunt the Republican Party in the 2022 midterms.

As Cupp explained, combined with the battle over gun laws, the unpopular 6-3 decision by the conservative court could be a defining issue that increases voter turnout that will, in turn, cripple GOP efforts to reclaim both chambers of Congress.

Speaking with CNN hosts Christ Paul and Boris Sanchez, Cupp insisted the past week’s news has benefitted Democrats as they make their case for November 2022 and beyond.

RELATED: ‘This is a losing issue’: GOP campaign consultants panicked about upcoming midterms after Roe decision

“Yeah, I think the Roe ruling was a huge — they [Republicans] might like the outcome, but politically I can’t imagine a better turnout engine than this ruling for democrats,” Cupp claimed. “And you can make the argument that the Republicans’ legislative victories and the Supreme Court victory by a conservative court are regressive, they’re taking us backwards. Whether you like them or not, you can’t deny the fact that they’re going backwards, right? They’re taking us back to a different time when these weren’t rights.”

“Republicans are banning books,” she continued. “I mean, it really does feel anachronistic where the country is, so I think that’s a good message for Democrats.”

“You know, look, the economy is still going to be a huge driver for the election but I absolutely think the Democrats got a big boost from both of these rulings, I feel like, and they needed it, politically,” she added.

Watch below:

 

Continue Reading

News

Marjorie Taylor Greene Flees Supreme Court Protest After Gloating About Abortion Ruling

Published

on

Far-right Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia was rushed by her staff away from the protest outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday as angry pro-choice protesters yelled at her.

Greene celebrated the court’s decision overturning abortion rights nationwide. Smiling and stating,  she said, “I am so happy. It’s a blessing. It’s a miracle.” Then, acknowledging the angry protestors, she said, “I think we have to worry about the radical left. They’re going to perform an insurrection here at the Supreme Court.”

Greene, a dependable troll, has used the word “insurrection” to describe any angry gathering of left-wing protesters. Meanwhile, she considers the actual insurrectionists arrested for ransacking the U.S. Capitol and trying to overthrow the 2020 presidential election “political prisoners.”

Greene’s celebratory moment was punctuated, however, by her staff rushing her off to a protected spot as protesters angrily shouted, “You are a traitor!” and “Lock her up!” One woman, holding an American flag and facemask tried shoving her way toward Greene while screaming, “My body, my choice!”

Greene later told The Hill that the court’s decision was “courageous,” adding, “It’s just taking it back to the states, giving the right back to the states to make their own laws regarding abortion, which is extremely important.”

An estimated 17 states are set to outlaw abortions soon after this ruling. Their criminalization will all but guarantee increased poverty for the poorest gestational parents carrying unwanted pregnancies as well as terrorist actions against abortion providers in adjoining states.

Continue Reading

'ACCOMPLICES

Trump Told Congressional Cronies How to Get Pardons for Aiding His Bogus Election Scheme, GOP Rep. Says

Published

on

Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks (pictured above) has shared an email of former President Donald Trump’s alleged instructions for Senate and House Republicans seeking preemptive pardons for their roles in helping Trump overturn the 2020 presidential election.

The January 11, 2021 email — which Brooks addressed to then-Special Assistant to the President and Oval Office Operations Coordinator Molly Michael — begins with the line, “President Trump asked me to send you this letter.”

“It is clear that deep-pocketed and vitriolic Socialist Democrats (with perhaps some liberal Republican help) are going to abuse America’s judicial system by targeting numerous Republicans with sham charges deriving from our recent fight for honest and accurate elections, and speeches related thereto,” the email continues.

Brooks then suggested that pardons be granted to any Republican who signed onto Texas’ lawsuit asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the outcome of the election, as well as any Congress members who rejected the Electoral College vote submissions of Arizona and Pennsylvania.

The email shows that Trump and Republicans had anticipated legal consequences for trying to overthrow the election. However, Trump never issued any such pardons because no Republicans were charged for their support of his bogus election conspiracy theory.

On Thursday, Cassidy Hutchinson — the aide to Trump’s White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows — told the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack that pardons were sought by Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz, Mo Brooks, Andy Biggs, Paul Gosar, Louie Gohmert, and Scott Perry. Perry denied the allegation.

On the same day, Brooks shared a letter he sent to the committee, which he called “The Witch Hunt Committee,” explaining his reasons for refusing to sit for a deposition interview.

In his letter, he falsely claimed that the committee refused to seat all of the Republican appointees that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy had nominated to it. In truth, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected two of the five Republicans that McCarthy had suggested because those two — Reps. Jim Banks and Jim Jordan — had allegedly made comments indicating that they would sabotage the committee’s investigation, Pelosi said.

Brooks also claimed that the committee was collecting depositions in a clandestine manner in “conflict with time-honored judicial processes.” But the committee isn’t a court. It’s not pursuing charges and, thus, its depositions aren’t part of a judicial process.

Brooks said he would only agree to a public deposition limited to questions about January 6, 2021 (whatever that means), and only if any communications or documents related to their questioning were submitted to him seven days before the public disposition occurs.

Needless to say, the committee will likely continue its work without Brooks.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.