Transgenders are covered by Civil Rights Act, says Eric Holder

By R. Siva Kumar - 20 Dec '14 01:34AM

The outgoing head of the Justice Department, Attorney General Eric Holder, has an earthshaking parting shot. He made a policy reversal in a memo which said that "the best reading" of Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964, protects transgenders from sex discrimination, according to thenewcivilrightsmovement.com.

He explained that the "best reading" of Title VII's prohibition of sex discrimination is that it includes discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status. He added that the "important shift" will see that the protection of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is also given to those who are being discriminated due to gender, including transgender status.

Eric Holder sent the memorandum on Thursday to all component heads and U.S. Attorneys. While outlining the department's history, he also recalled that even in 2006, the department had opposed the claims, according to Buzzfeed.

The trial court in which the claim was raised disagreed with the department. It had favored Diane Schroer in a claim that transgender discrimination did not keep sync with Title VII's sex discrimination ban. Even in 2012, Mia Macy filed a claim and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had come to the same decision.

Holder wrote that the Department will no more hold that Title VII's ban on discrimination based on sex does not include gender identity, which also translates into transgender discrimination.

This definitely advances equality. The American Military Partner Association (AMPA) clarified that it is asking the Defense Department to put a closure to its present "unjustified sex discrimination" against transgender troops and remove the ban on "open and honest service".

Pointing out that it will encourage equal rights and consistent treatment, Holder said that it will also strengthen Civil Rights and impart "fair and impartial justice" to all the Americans.

While many supporters of the new memo would find it remarkable and laudatory, some opponents already point out that Holder is "confused" about Title VII. As The National Review says: "if Title VII broadly bars discrimination 'founded on sex-based considerations,' I don't see why Holder isn't also contending that Title VII's plain meaning bars discrimination based on sexual orientation."