What Is The Meaning Of… “Sex?”

Do you remember when Congress took up the debate of the meaning of “sex” when President Clinton said he didn’t have “sex” with Monica Lewinsky.

Well today the U.S. Supreme Court debated the meaning of “sex.”

Supreme Court clashes over meaning of ‘sex’ in LGBT discrimination cases

• The justices of the Supreme Court clashed over the meaning of “sex” in heated oral arguments on Tuesday for a blockbuster set of cases concerning the rights of LGBT workers.

• The court heard the cases of three LGBT employees, two gay men and a transgender woman, who claim they were fired because of their identities.

• At issue was the meaning of Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids discrimination because of “sex” but does not specifically refer to gender identity or sexual orientation.

CNBC
By Tucker Higgins
Updated minutes ago.

[…]
Arguments, which lasted two hours, concluded around noon. It was not immediately clear which side will garner a majority. Decisions are expected by June of 2020.
[…]
Several of the court’s conservatives argued that expanding Title 7 to include discrimination against LGBT workers would be better handled by Congress. Attorneys for both sides have acknowledged that at the time the law was passed in 1964, its drafters likely did not envision that it would apply to gay or transgender individuals.

Justice Samuel Alito, one of the court’s Republican appointees, noted that Congress has had time since the law was first passed to add protections for LGBT workers, and has declined to do so. If the court said the law applied to gay workers, “we will be acting exactly like a legislature,” he said.
[…]
But Justice Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump’s first appointee to the bench, suggested with his questioning that he was sympathetic to the argument that the word “sex” necessarily includes sexual orientation as well as gender identity.

Then it was the plaintive turn to defend their position.

“Interpreting a statute is not depriving the democratic process,” Cole [David Cole, an ACLU attorney] said.

In an exchange with Cole, Gorsuch said “I’m with you” on the text of the statute, adding that it it was “really close.” But he expressed reservations about other elements of the case, warning of “massive social upheaval” should the Supreme Court rule for Cole’s client. “That’s an essentially legislative decision,” he added.
[…]
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the senior member of the court’s liberal wing, noted that interpretations of Title 7 had changed in the past. Since the law was enacted, the Supreme Court has held that it applied to discrimination based on sex stereotypes, as well as same-sex harassment, two zones that were not likely on the minds of the legislators who voted for it.

And Kavanaugh didn’t ask any questions (Probably because there was no beer being discussed)

So ladies and gentleman we will now have to wait until June to find out if we have our human rights or if we are second class citizens.