On October 8, 2019 there were three cases argued before the United States Supreme Court,Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia,R&G & G&R. Harris Funeral Home, Inc. v. EEOC, andAltitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda.Central to the cases is the following question:"Whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination 'because of . . . sex' within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? "

InShowdown Over LGBTQEmployment Rights Hits the Supreme Court [link],NPR's Morning Edition provided and excellent guide to the arguments raised by each side insupport of their positions.As you read/listen to the piece, notice that an argument emerges.On one side, it is argued that at the time the law was enacted, those who drafted it did not contemplate sexual orientation/identity as part of the definition.On the other side, it is argued that the terms of the statute have been expanded throughout the years to include several types of discrimination and that sexual orientation/identity is, in essence, a logical extension of the original statute. [Shades of Thomas Jefferson and Antonin Scalia from the first module].

Please make arguments on each side of the assigned issue before reaching your conclusion. Remember that balance is important, and advocating for positions with which you may not agree, while difficult, is essential to good legal argument.There is ultimate no Yes or No answer, but rather how you arrive at your conclusion, please include where you find your supporting evidence/articles.

***The question is: "Whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination 'because of . . . sex' within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?"***