Since 1964, it has been against the law to discriminate against someone because of their race, ethnicity or sex in the workplace. While this has not eliminated the practice altogether, it has allowed those discriminated against the ability to seek legal justice for their mistreatment.

​

According to a 2017 Gallup poll, an estimated 4.5% of Americans identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. As they deliberate three LGBT discrimination suits, the Supreme Court is considering whether the protections outlined in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act apply to these citizens. They will soon decide whether the roughly 14 million LGBT Americans may be fired from their jobs solely because of their orientation or gender identity.

​

The court has yet to make a decision. Plaintiffs Aimee Stephens, a transgender woman, and Gerald Bostock and the late Donald Zarda, both gay men, claim they were fired after their employers learned of their sexual orientation. Several legal groups are working to encourage the justices to reach a decision in favor of LGBT Americans.

​

The American Civil Liberties Union, which has long been an advocate of LGBT rights, provides co-counsel to Zarda’s case and supports the others. Additionally, the National Women’s Law Center is advocating on behalf of the LGBT community. These groups are backed by the nation’s larger liberal and queer communities, but generally, there has been a trend overall of more Americans, regardless of political beliefs, supporting LGBT-identifying people.

​

According to a study by Williams Institute researcher Andrew Flores, from 1977 to 2014 there was a “rapid and significant increase” in the number of Americans supporting their LGBT peers. As marriage equality has passed and queer groups have grown louder and prouder over the years since this study was published, there is little indication that this trend has reversed.

​

However, the current administration has left many LGBT Americans concerned that their liberties will go unprotected. John Jardin, a junior student ambassador for the University of Georgia’s LGBT Resource Center, is among them. While he believes the plaintiffs have a good chance of winning, he pointed out the high stakes. 

​

“It’s more important than the same-sex marriage decision,” Jardin said, “because I think that jobs…[are] way more important to your livelihood.”

​

He also pointed out that while marriage equality was a step forward, it only benefitted more privileged members of the LGBT community. Jardin noted that ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in these cases will protect “all different types of queer people, specifically transfolk of color.”

​

Several groups, however, are actively working in opposition to the cases. Brian S. Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage and its offshoot group The International Congress of Families, was photographed with Supreme Court justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh on Oct. 29. ICF states that its mission is to “defend the natural family.” The Southern Poverty Law Center recognized it as an anti-LGBT hate group in 2016.

​

While these groups include a subset of far-right Americans, a larger population of conservatives are concerned not with LGBT rights but the legality of the Supreme Court making a decision concerning legislation. Kemper Higgins, a freshman political science major who identifies as a conservative libertarian, believes that the court making a decisive ruling would go against the United States’ system of checks and balances.

​

“When that act was written, sex did not mean anything but man or woman,” said Higgins. He later added, “using the Supreme Court as a way to change the meaning of a legal document gets into some murky territory with the job of the Supreme Court.”

​

The justices appear to be divided along similar ideological lines in this issue, with the more liberal in favor of ruling that sex discrimination includes LGBT identities and the more conservative justices against such a decision. Justice Sotomayor argued that LGBT people are still “a suspect class to some people,” and American law has consistently, if slowly and painfully, worked toward protecting marginalized groups such as this.

​

When asked about the possibility of the court ruling against LGBT Americans, Jardin said, “this would just be a nail in the coffin for so many young queer folks across the country."