Accessibility Tools

Skip to main content

Supreme Court Ruling Limits Transgender Rights

Written on .

There have been several recent developments concerning transgender rights.  Most interpret the Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, as including protection for sexual orientation and sexual identity under the prohibitions of “sex discrimination” under the nation’s employment laws.  However, the Bostock ruling expressly stated that it did not resolve all issues such as those associated with locker rooms and bathrooms.  

On May 15, 2025, the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Texas struck down portions of the EEOC’s 2024 Guidance pertaining to sexual orientation and gender identity under Title VII, which prevented the use of the vacated portions of the 2024 Guidance across the country.  State of Texas v. EEOC, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division.

More recently, on June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that a public employee health plan’s blanket coverage exclusion for gender dysphoria treatments did not violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.  U.S. v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477.  Justice Roberts writing for the 6-3 majority stated that there were sincere concerns about these issues, but the Constitution does not resolve these disagreements and the task is best left to the legislature or Congress.  The High Court had previously issued an emergency order allowing the administration to implement its ban on transgender individuals serving in the military.  The result is that the future of gender treatments will be dependent on each state legislature, much like the abortion issue.  The rationale of the opinion was that the Tennessee law, while it referenced sex, did not actually discriminate on the basis of sex.  Instead, it focused on two distinctions:  The age of the patient and the medical use of treatment such as puberty blockers.

The EEOC under the current administration recently halted work on transgender worker discrimination charges.  However, on July 1, 2025, the agency’s Director of the Office of Field Programs announced that the EEOC was “in the clear to continue processing” charges that “falls squarely under” the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bostock ruling.  The EEOC announcement indicated that the agency would process transgender charges applicable to employment issues such as hiring, discharge or promotion. 

    This article is part of our August 2025 Newsletter. 

    View the newsletter online

    Download the newsletter as a PDF

    Get Email Updates

    Receive newsletters and alerts directly in your email inbox. Sign up below.
    security vehicle
    DHS announced the termination of all categorical family reunification parole programs for nationals of Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador…
    ethiopia
    DHS announced the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Ethiopia, effective February 13, 2026. The previous expiration date w…
    files stacked
    Employers have varied practices regarding what materials to add to employee personnel files, but such materials generally include on-boardi…
    electronic devices
    Many employers have not adequately considered that business-related communications exist on personal employees’ cell phones and other devic…
    mechanical calculator printer
    A settlement agreement of a discrimination case can be instrumental in determining its tax treatment.  First, any portion of the settlement…
    clock and calendar
    Employers should be aware that the federal COBRA law requires employers with 20 or more employees to allow workers to temporarily continue…