Kristi spent nearly 20 years over three decades working in funeral services, a career she discovered while studying to become a Baptist minister. She enjoyed her vocation knowing that she was helping people remember their loved ones at peace and received positive feedback from her employer and coworkers. Her experience and contact with the community were two of the many benefits which her employer, HCRWR Funeral Home, valued.

Kristi said that as early as age five, she knew she was a girl. In 2015, Kristi started seeing a therapist to discuss and explore her knowledge that she is a woman. By 2019, Kristi made the decision to tell her coworkers that she is a woman. Two weeks after she told her supervisor in 2020, HCRWR Funeral Home fired her. This caused Kristi and her wife Cricket to suffer financially and left Kristi without health insurance. At the time, she was diagnosed with kidney failure.

After Kristi was fired, she filed a complaint with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC sued the funeral home for sex discrimination and Kristi has joined the suit to ensure her interests are protected as the case moves forward. The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether it is sex discrimination under federal civil rights statutes to fire someone because the person is transgender.

Her employer states they fired Kristi because she had become the lead director and the face of the Funeral Home, and her new revelation has placed their conservative business in jeopardy. They assert that their clientele is comprised primarily of a deeply conservative protestant-based community. Over half the client's they serve are fundamentalist Baptist that will not appreciate doing business with Kristi. Many pastors and community members have already reached out to HCRWR regardinghowKristi's continued employment with the funeral home would prohibit their members from doing business with the funeral home. HCRWR asserts that the termination was all about negative economic impact and not at all related to gender or sex discrimination.

.

1. Issue - focus on gender discrimination cases, what issue or issues could be presented here? Y
2. Rule - What rules would the Court most likely use to analyze this case?
3. Application - How would it apply the rules to this case's facts compared to the relevant cases we have read?
4. Conclusion - What would be the Court's conclusion on this case?