Supreme Courts Rules Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Protected By Title VII

I told you so.

This one isn’t Donald Trump’s fault.

New York Times:

“The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a landmark civil rights law protects gay and transgender workers from workplace discrimination, handing the movement for L.G.B.T. equality a stunning victory.

The vote was 6 to 3, with Justice Neil M. Gorsuch writing the majority opinion. He was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

The case concerned Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars employment discrimination based on race, religion, national origin and sex. The question for the justices was whether that last prohibition — discrimination “because of sex”— applies to many millions of gay and transgender workers.

The decision, covering two cases, was the court’s first on L.G.B.T. rights since the retirement in 2018 of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinions in all four of the court’s major gay rights decisions. …”


“In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, the court was asked to decide whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in which Congress outlawed the discrimination of individuals on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, applied to employers firing an employee for being gay or transgender. Writing for the court, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote,

The answer is clear. An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undistinguishable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids. …”

John Roberts and Neil Gorsuch are responsible for this.

John Roberts was nominated by George W. Bush. Neil Gorsuch was nominated by Trump. In the latter case, Trump simply nominated the judge that the conservative liberal movement told him to pick. Even with Anthony Kennedy gone, Roberts and Gorsuch are carrying on the storied tradition of Republican judges always ruling against social conservatives and in favor of progressives.

Back when Barack Obama was president, the Supreme Court gutted Arizona’s immigration law, upheld Obamacare, upheld affirmative action and disparate impact. There has been a “conservative majority” on the Supreme Court for over 30 years and Democrats have only nominated 4 out of the last 14 Supreme Court justices. And yet, social conservatives have been routed time and again.

This is a scam. It has always been a scam. Don’t be fooled again by the argument that you have to vote for Trump to get “conservative judges.” There has never been any meaningful difference on social issues. Corporate America always gets what it wants and it supports this ruling.

About Hunter Wallace 12387 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. The courts are allowed to overrule voters and presidents. They were only supposed to advise on constitutional issues, not have veto power over how society is run. Shakespeare was right; let’s kill all the lawyers.

      • Whatchu talkin’ ’bout, Whitey? Federal judges have mandated that schools must build local school facilities that meet their criteria for “equal;” they have forced environmental cleanups on small towns, school busing on wealthier ones. Federal judges have overturned anti-gay marriage propositions passed in various states. Other measures approved by voters or their representatives, but not liked by one Federal judge, have been thrown out. The Supreme Court has said at different times whether or not discrimination is legal, and made abortion legal in every state. They insisted the Fugitive Slave Act was legal and must be enforced during the Civil War. The Tenth Amendment was stomped to an ignoble death by black-robed tyrants a long time ago.

        • Supreme Court renders an opinion. The Supreme Court, itself, does not change the law. The representatives of each state vote on legislation to change the law.

          • I just showed you that’s not how it works. It didn’t work that way when it came to abortion in 1973 and gay marriage in 2015. You’re being strangely insistent, considering it’s easily proven how wrong you are. It’s odd that someone that typically looks beyond the surface can’t see beyond it in this transparently obvious case. For one more example, one earlier in US history: Way back in 1824 (Gibbons v. Ogden), the SC invalidated state laws that interfered with interstate commerce. The legislatures of the states, and the laws they passed, didn’t matter. Get it now?

      • @Snow…

        Absolutely. It is not incumbent upon the states to cashier their sovereignty.

        That said, it seems that, in this era, it is only The Blue Leftist States that have the courage of their conviction.

        In any case, we’ll see.

    • The Constitution can be interpreted to mean anything you want to mean; whatever just enough people in positions of power say it means, it means; whether legislature, or judiciary. The SC having the ultimate say. The mantra of making laws vs interpreting laws is a bogus word game. Whether judges are “interpreting” the constitution or being legislatures is a national narrative trope ; its meaningless; call it interpret or activism; they court has the power to decide any way they want!

      • The Constitution can be interpreted to mean anything you want to mean

        The Constitution is very much like the Bible, then!

  2. Living in the oldest plantation part of The South (The Southeastern Virginney- Northwestern North Carolina area) one of many things interesting about this ‘decision’ is how much the overwhelming majority of Negroes who live in our area, especially the males, detest any notion of Civil Right’s Legislation being applied to sexual deviants.

    In their words, and I have them ringing in my ears, they feel completely belittled by what they regard as their fight to be seen as ‘Men’ in our eyes, and, as well, The Law, to be denigrated to people, relationships, and circumstances of which they do not at all approve.

    In fact, many a time there has been, when I have been a visitor at a local Negro Church, I have listened to the preacher and thought to myself, ‘Hmm … if he were just a few shades lighter, his sentiments and words about The Modern United states’ of America might get him mistaken for that of a Grand Dragon of a Local Klan.

    • Want to hear “racial hatred?” Listen to blacks tear into Jews and Asians sometime. The bloodlust is barely restrained.

    • I have heard this claimed before about Blacks, but, when are blacks to be taken seriously?

      Have you ever seen a Black shim?

    • The “Southeastern Virginney- Northwestern North Carolina area”? That makes no geographic sense.

      • No, it doesn’t. And North Carolina was never original plantation territory either; South Carolina and the Virginia Tidewater (bordering the Chesapeake; central coastal VA) would be that. Northeastern NC was swampland, northwestern NC was and is mountains, and all of it was poor redneck territory.

        I have no idea what Ivan thinks he’s trying to pull here.

        As for what blacks think, what does it matter? Words don’t count. Actions do.

  3. “What about Supreme Court appointments?,” is the very last appeal that the Republicans make to get you to vote for them. You’ve heard it numerous times before and you’ll hear it again in October. Like their other standard (and phony– like anti-abortion, Obamacare repeal, anti- illegal immigration, etc) campaign talking points this one will now fall on deaf ears.

    I would like the government to make an official announcement that you have no right to freedom of association.

    • @Mestigoit…

      I totally agree with the drift of your comment – voting Republican, just they can give away whatever still remains of ‘The American Way’, is not very enticing – NOT ONE BIT!

  4. Yes Hunter, it is a scam. “It’s morning in America.” Reagan said in 1981.
    If so, when do we wake up from this “conservative” nightmare of liberal social re-ordering?

    I recently posted Charles Lindbergh’s 1941 speech on my blog warning about Jewish influence in America.
    He was a man of courage and vision. Compare any GOP “conservative” today to Charles Lindbergh and you quickly see how far America and it’s GOP defenders have fallen.

    • @Geir…

      If Lindbergh were in this country today, he would be commenting at this site, with The SPLC and Antifa filing his every remark…

    • That is why FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to be bombed, he didn’t warn the commanding officers to take precautions that probably would have caused Japan to call off its attack because of the loss of secrecy, the key to their attack. FDR was a traitor and a war criminal.

      The GOP was actually mostly isolationist then as were most Democrat voters too. Once again, what has been presented in history books as a groundswell of popular support for a cause was actually a top down, carefully designed, opportunistic policy change, public consensus to follow later.

      • @12…

        Yes, FDR allowed Pearl Harbour to be attacked.

        it is simply too impossible that the 4 carriers, the most important ships, would be away, and without escort.

  5. It is all in preparation for the Moshiach, the Jew God of rectal loving, the jew messiah, the son of perdition.

  6. Roberts is a Roman Catholic, and Gorsuch is a former Roman Catholic, both voted to protect the homosexual Roman Catholic priesthood, and, lesbian Nuns.

  7. I saw this article earlier:

    A lot of people are confused why nothing has been done about BLM burning everything to the ground, destroying the livelihoods of business owners and the employees who worked at these stores. They are even getting support from the military. What is going on? The answer is in this article. Everything the American empire does is in service of expanding and perpetuating the empire. What is happening here is a second civil rights movement, meant to make the USA appear appealing to the various brown countries. The purpose of this is to gain their allegiance and undermine Chinese diplomatic outreach to these same brown countries to set the stage for the Chinese cold war. The first civil rights movement served the same foreign policy purpose, to make the USA appealing to third world countries versus the USSR.

    We will be seeing more and more stories in the media painting China and its sphere as “fascist” and the USA retaking its role as “leader of the free world.” Even antifa firs in here, as the USA will attempt to rally these far left radlibs against China (as they previously did against Assad in Syria, for example). Looking at it from this perspective, the whole BLM episode looks less like irrational state failure and decay and more like a rational and calculated move of the American Leviathan.

    • Dart, the USSR and China chased out the whites in Africa after the Civil rights movement in the late 60’s . The Portages, Rhodesia, and South African whites no longer rule. The current countries of formal white rule Angola, Zimbabwe, South Africa/Namibia and Mozambique have a proxy communist government and ideology. The Western powers did not help at all with staling the insurrection. China and (((Bankers))) are not going to lose control of the rare minerals and Usury any time soon unless BLM helps lol!

    • Assad is a mass murderer of Sunni Syrian Arabs ;in spite of the rhetoric the US has NOT stopped his holocaust of them but on the contrary, labeled all Syrians opposed to his brutal regime terrorists, Alquada, ISIS and sided with the Kurds who hate Arabs.

    • @Dart…

      ‘U.S. rivals’ fear of democracy led Russia to invade Ukraine—to destroy a democracy that was starting to function normally, with citizens demanding that leaders who don’t deliver be replaced.”

      With perspectives like this in the article, Dear Dart, it was hard to take the article seriously.

      • The article is from the perspective of American foreign policy goons. It’s not my opinion. I’m showing how the BLM riots fit rationally into American foreign policy goals and why we have seen things like military kneeling down for blacks. The riots are allowed to happen because they fit into the greater strategy of the American empire, which is pivoting to Asia for the Chinese cold war.

  8. The United States of Sodom-Gomorrah highest court has ruled. May God put this dying nation out of its misery very soon.

    • @Banned…

      As you know – equality is God in the Modern United States’ of America, and, that so, all traditional institutions and customs will be put to bed, if they have not already.

      • Equality is the Old God. Black Supremacy is the New God, and White Submission is his holy son. Out with the old, in with the new.

  9. Well, isn’t that a special gift SCOTUS gave to the mutant community during “pride month.” Not even woke corporations could have accelerated globohomo like the less than supremes have with their ruling.

    Just make it official. The American flag should be 50 stars of david, and the stripes should be the colors of the rainbow.

    How is that WWII outcome looking now?

  10. Trump picked Gorsuch and he’s fully responsible for it. “Trump just does what he’s told by the GOP” that is bullshit. Jews are revoking the US Constitution through their Federalist Society agents.

  11. Was Gorsuch the one who upheld Trump’s Muslim ban[ tweaked to not look obvious]? No surprise ; more getting our ducks in order tool[ we have the moral high ground ] the US can now use to go after Arab/Muslim countries for still having anti gay laws. It’s not a coincidence how as soon as conservatives/republicans realized they hated Muslims, they all became SJW for gay rights!

  12. Globalhomo wins again and conservative judges gorush and kavanagh are proven to be good shabbos butt goys

  13. Excellent, I support this ruling! My gender is fluid, especially when a company starts to trample my rights as a worker I start identifying as other genders. Remember, this is an option we have, we can literally make this stuff up, there is no standard set by the courts, and this ruling is ridiculous but if we had any strategic inclination we would celebrate it, because it ultimately gives the individual great power over corporations if we use it properly, and who cares how you look doing it, do you think a mentally ill man dressing as woman has the same inner shame? Let’s use this to destroy them.

Comments are closed.