Joe's Cheap Ho's
2020-12-12 22:35:58 UTC
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/11/us/mi-ag-appeals-state-same-sex-ruling-trnd/index.html
Rudy, the short usenet liberal retard, will have to find a new place to
eat when he visits MI.
Rudy is a cretin of habit, he eats at the same places a lot. HeRudy, the short usenet liberal retard, will have to find a new place to
eat when he visits MI.
eats those guys with the shorts hanging down below their ass
just above their knees.
=====
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said she will appeal a Michigan
Claims Court judge's ruling that allows discrimination against a
same-sex couple on religious grounds.
Judge Christopher Murray ruled Monday that discrimination against people
on the basis of their gender identity was unlawful, but he concurrently
ruled that a refusal, on religious freedom grounds, to serve customers
based on their sexual orientation was permissible.
The lawsuits came after two companies barred serving a same-sex couple
and a transgender individual "on religious grounds," the opinion states.
One of the two businesses is an event center, while the other is a
business specializing in permanent hair removal for women, according to
state licensing records.
Nessel, in a press release Thursday, praised Murray's ruling against
transgender discrimination but said she would appeal the ruling that the
laws in place allow for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Supreme Court says federal law protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
Supreme Court says federal law protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
"Michigan courts have held that federal precedent is highly persuasive
when determining the contours of the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act
(ELCRA), and federal courts across the country -- including the U.S.
Supreme Court in Bostock v Clayton Co -- have held that discrimination
on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination,"
Nessel said. "We intend to submit that all Michigan residents are
entitled to protection under the law -- regardless of their gender
identity or sexual orientation -- in our appeal to this decision."
Nessel also quoted Stacie Clayton, the chairwoman of the Michigan Civil
Rights Commission, who said that "continuing to interpret the word 'sex'
in a more restrictive way than we do any of the other protected classes
under ELCRA is in itself discriminatory."
Murray's decision held that legal precedent in Michigan -- namely under
a prior ruling in Barbour v. Department of Social Services in 1993 --
and the subsequent Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act includes prohibiting
discrimination based on sex, which Murray believed encompasses "gender
identity."
The same laws do not include any explicit protection against
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, as the ELCRA only
spells out protections against "religion, race, color, national origin,
age, sex, or marital status," according to the ruling.
"With respect to whether sexual orientation falls within the meaning of
'sex' under the ELCRA, the Court of Appeals has already concluded that
it does not," Murray wrote.
Murray's opinion concluded that the ruling is not final, as "it does not
resolve all of the pending issues in this case," he wrote.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said she will appeal a Michigan
Claims Court judge's ruling that allows discrimination against a
same-sex couple on religious grounds.
Judge Christopher Murray ruled Monday that discrimination against people
on the basis of their gender identity was unlawful, but he concurrently
ruled that a refusal, on religious freedom grounds, to serve customers
based on their sexual orientation was permissible.
The lawsuits came after two companies barred serving a same-sex couple
and a transgender individual "on religious grounds," the opinion states.
One of the two businesses is an event center, while the other is a
business specializing in permanent hair removal for women, according to
state licensing records.
Nessel, in a press release Thursday, praised Murray's ruling against
transgender discrimination but said she would appeal the ruling that the
laws in place allow for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Supreme Court says federal law protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
Supreme Court says federal law protects LGBTQ workers from discrimination
"Michigan courts have held that federal precedent is highly persuasive
when determining the contours of the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act
(ELCRA), and federal courts across the country -- including the U.S.
Supreme Court in Bostock v Clayton Co -- have held that discrimination
on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination,"
Nessel said. "We intend to submit that all Michigan residents are
entitled to protection under the law -- regardless of their gender
identity or sexual orientation -- in our appeal to this decision."
Nessel also quoted Stacie Clayton, the chairwoman of the Michigan Civil
Rights Commission, who said that "continuing to interpret the word 'sex'
in a more restrictive way than we do any of the other protected classes
under ELCRA is in itself discriminatory."
Murray's decision held that legal precedent in Michigan -- namely under
a prior ruling in Barbour v. Department of Social Services in 1993 --
and the subsequent Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act includes prohibiting
discrimination based on sex, which Murray believed encompasses "gender
identity."
The same laws do not include any explicit protection against
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, as the ELCRA only
spells out protections against "religion, race, color, national origin,
age, sex, or marital status," according to the ruling.
"With respect to whether sexual orientation falls within the meaning of
'sex' under the ELCRA, the Court of Appeals has already concluded that
it does not," Murray wrote.
Murray's opinion concluded that the ruling is not final, as "it does not
resolve all of the pending issues in this case," he wrote.
