Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda

rdf:langString Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda

rdf:langString

rdf:langString Altitude Express, Inc., et al. v. Melissa Zarda, as Executor of the Estate of Donald Zarda, et al.

rdf:langString Kavanaugh

rdf:langString Alito

rdf:langString Thomas

rdf:langString Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan

rdf:langString ___

rdf:langString Altitude Express, Inc., et al. v. Melissa Zarda, as Executor of the Estate of Donald Zarda, et al.

rdf:langString An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

rdf:langString Altitude Express, Inc.v. Zarda

rdf:langString Gorsuch

rdf:langString Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), is a landmark United States Supreme Court civil rights case which ruled that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 employees could not be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The case involved Donald Zarda, a skydiving instructor for Altitude Express who had told a female customer of his gay identity to make her more comfortable being attached to him during a skydive. She and her boyfriend later expressed their objections to Altitude, leading to Zarda's dismissal on the claim of misconduct. Zarda filed suit in 2014 on the basis of employment discrimination, and though Zarda died in a parachuting accident that year, his family continued the legal battle. While the District Court ruled in favor of Altitude Express in Zarda v. Altitude Express, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned, ruling that Title VII does protect employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation, adding to a circuit split. The Supreme Court accepted Altitude Express's petition and consolidated the case alongside Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, a similar case of sexual orientation discrimination from the Eleventh Circuit but which ruled that Title VII did not cover such discrimination. Oral arguments were heard on October 8, 2019 alongside the case R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which dealt with Title VII and employment protections for transgender people. The Court ruled in a 6–3 decision for Bostock, covering all three cases, on June 15, 2020, that Title VII protections do apply to gay and transgender persons.