October Term 2019 · Docket 18-107
Does Title VII protect transgender employees from discrimination?
A funeral home fired a transgender woman. The EEOC says this violates federal law. The employer says sex and gender identity are different.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Bursch argued sex and transgender status are independent concepts. He stated equal treatment does not mean treating men as women.
General Francisco argued the case is not close textually. He addressed Justice Gorsuch's comment about the textual nature of the case.
Mr. Cole stated Aimee Stephens was a valued employee for six years. He noted she was fired after telling her boss she identifies as a woman.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-25
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
A funeral home fired a transgender woman. The EEOC says this violates federal law. The employer says sex and gender identity are different.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 47-11
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 8, 2019.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-23
What each side wants
The funeral home wants to keep its bathroom rules. It argues sex and gender identity are separate.
The EEOC wants to protect transgender workers. It argues discrimination based on gender identity is sex discrimination.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 47-11
What each side says
The funeral home argues sex and transgender status are independent concepts. It claims equal treatment does not mean treating men as women.
The EEOC argues the case is not close textually. It claims a reasonable person would be harmed by such rules.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 47-11
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked what law guides judges in balancing these interests. She noted the question becomes inevitable if the employer wins.
Justice Gorsuch asked if a reasonable person would be harmed by bathroom rules. He suggested this might be the core issue.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-25
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of workplace protections. It determines if federal law covers gender identity. Employers and employees need clear rules for daily conduct.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 47-11
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-25
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 47-11
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.