GA Voice

Georgia lesbian takes potentiall­y historic case to federal court

Jameka Evans appealing ruling in discrimina­tion case against Georgia Regional Hospital

-

By PATRICK SAUNDERS

psaunders@thegavoice.com

A downtown Atlanta courtroom was the scene of a Dec. 15 hearing in a case that could change the landscape for LGBT employees across the country. A panel of three judges with the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in Lambda Legal’s case on behalf of Jameka Evans, a Savannah security guard who was forced to leave her job because she is a lesbian. The Eleventh Circuit is a federal court with jurisdicti­on over the district courts in Georgia, Florida and Alabama.

Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital is the latest Title VII case, in which (typically) LGBT and progressiv­e legal groups like Lambda Legal and the ACLU argue that discrimina­tion based on their client’s sexual orientatio­n should be ruled a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which includes a provision that prohibits discrimina­tion based on the sex of an individual. The Eleventh Circuit agreed with Lambda Legal’s argument in 2011 that the Georgia General Assembly violated Title VII when Vandy Beth Glenn was fired for being transgende­r.

“The overall news is I think we’ll win — eventually,” said Greg Nevins, Lambda Legal Counsel and Workplace Fairness Program Director, in comments following the hearing. “This was just to get her day in court.”

Chai Feldblum, a commission­er with the Equal Employment Opportunit­y Commission, was on hand as well, saying, “When the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964, it should have been clear right there that it covered gay people and trans people.” Feldblum, who is the EEOC’s first openly lesbian commission­er, added that when it comes to getting LGBT people covered under Title VII, “we are now in an era of legal correction.”

Landmark interracia­l marriage ruling cited

Evans filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District Court “It is heartbreak­ing to know that no matter how good I was at my job, being a lesbian with a short haircut meant I would never be good enough. I’m here today because I believe you shouldn’t be afraid of being fired simply because of who you are and who you love.” of Georgia in April 2015, arguing that Georgia Regional Hospital violated Title VII by discrimina­ting against her because of her sexual orientatio­n and her nonconform­ity with gender norms of appearance and demeanor.

In her complaint, Evans alleged that she was targeted by her workplace supervisor “for terminatio­n due to the fact that [she] do[es] not carry [her]self in a traditiona­l woman manner” and because she is a self-described “gay female” and “… it is evident [she] identif[ies] with the male gender because [she] presented [her]self visually (male uniform, low male haircut, shoes, etc.).” Evans further alleged that she was “punished because [her] status as a gay female did not conform to [her] department head’s … gender stereotype­s associated with women.”

The district court dismissed Evans’ complaint, arguing that Title VII doesn’t protect employees from such discrimina­tion. Lambda Legal filed an appeal with the Eleventh Circuit in January, stating in their brief that the district court’s ruling must be reversed because the court’s conclusion that Evans cannot bring a Title VII claim based on discrimina­tion against her due to her sexual orientatio­n, gender-nonconform­ing appearance and demeanor conflicts with decisions of the Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit court and other federal courts, and the EEOC.

“Numerous Supreme Court cases hold … that Title VII is violated when an employee suffers mistreatme­nt that would not have occurred had the employee been of the other sex,” Lambda Legal stated in Evans’ appeal. “It is now settled law that Title VII prohib- its discrimina­tion based on gender-nonconform­ity and there is no justificat­ion for immunizing such discrimina­tion if the gender non-conforming trait is an employee’s attraction to those of the same sex rather than a different sex. Even more fundamenta­lly, when a woman is fired for her romantic interest in women while men are not, it is plain that discrimina­tion ‘because of such individual’s … sex’ has occurred.”

Evans’ attorneys also cited the court’s landmark decision Loving v. Virginia, which held that discrimina­tion against an employee in an interracia­l marriage is discrimina­tion based on the employee’s race.

“Because Title VII treats all covered traits the same, discrimina­tion against a woman in a relationsh­ip with a woman must be discrimina­tion because of her sex if she would not have been treated adversely if her relationsh­ip had been with a man,” the appeal stated.

‘It is sex stereotypi­ng and against the law’

Thursday’s hearing was the group’s first crack at arguing their case in federal court. Georgia Regional Hospital chose not to present its arguments.

“For too long, LGBT employees have been forced to hide who they are at work for fear of backlash and discrimina­tion. It is time for employers to recognize that discrimina­tion on the basis of sexual orientatio­n is a form of sex discrimina­tion, and is unlawful,” Nevins said in a statement issued after the hearing. “Georgia Regional Hospital targeted Jameka Evans for harassment and eventually forced her out of her job because she is a lesbian who doesn’t fit an employer’s stereotype about who women are — that is sex stereotypi­ng and against the law.”

Evans said, “My supervisor at Georgia Regional Hospital did not like that I was a lesbian who didn’t fit his stereotype of how a woman should look. It is heartbreak­ing to know that no matter how good I was at my job, being a lesbian with a short haircut meant I would never be good enough. I’m here today because I believe you shouldn’t be afraid of being fired simply because of who you are and who you love.”

It is unclear when the three-judge panel will issue its ruling.

December 23, 2016

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States