Beth Littrell, Counsel and Racial Justice and Low-Income Advocacy Strategist
We are extremely disappointed that Georgia’s antigay lawmakers are once again trying to allow religious discrimination in many areas of life for Georgia’s families, workers and others.
Christopher Clark, Midwest Regional Director and National Pro Bono Director
Nothing in the Indiana Constitution prevents the state legislature from protecting LGBT Hoosiers from the real harms caused by discrimination. As a matter of fact, the Constitution stands with LGBT Hoosiers who seek to live their lives without fear of discrimination.
It is essential that we launch 2016 remaining staunch against efforts to create religious carve-outs, to expand beyond all recognition what religious freedom really means, and to turn civil rights laws perversely into tools for discrimination.
Carmina Ocampo, Staff Attorney and Immigrants’ Rights Program Strategist
In our work on behalf of LGBTQ people and people living with HIV, we have fought for years against group-based discrimination, stigma, and violence against members of our community. Our community has experienced being profiled and harassed by the police, and a continuing history of being labeled, stigmatized and rejected as outsiders and as a dangerous threat by society.
When introduced in November 2015, Indiana Senate Bill 100 was presented as a bill to add sexual orientation and gender identity protections to Indiana law, which lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Hoosiers urgently need. Unfortunately, the bill that was introduced provides little meaningful protection from discrimination for transgender people and includes damaging carve-outs and exemptions targeting all LGBT people in Indiana. While broadly problematic, there are six key problems with SB100:
SB100 denies LGBT people protections others receive, invites discrimination against transgender people, eliminates local civil rights laws, and protects both licensed professionals who discriminate and religiously affiliated medical and social service providers that discriminate with public funds.
More than 100 state bills so far have aimed to use religious beliefs as an excuse for discrimination. The idea is to allow businesses and public employees to mistreat LGBT people and consider married same-sex couples as unmarried.
The Supreme Court agrees with the EEOC: Nondiscrimination means religious pluralism and problem-solving, not conformity and exclusions
On Monday the Supreme Court ruled in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a case brought by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
The case challenged an employer’s use of a supposedly neutral employee “look” policy against caps to refuse to hire a young Muslim woman, Samantha Elauf, because she wears a headscarf.
Today, Indiana elected officials announced that they have agreed on new language to modify the recently enacted law that invites discrimination against LGBT people and others in the state.
