jimnyc
12-19-2014, 02:31 PM
So Holder can go back 50 years and retroactively add something to the Civil Rights Act? People have been discriminated against for this, yes, but there's a proper way to change this. People are discriminated against due to obesity as well, and you can't just add it in now. There are all kinds of reasons that people use to discriminate that are perfectly legal, while maybe not unfair. We can't just take old laws and change them on the fly though. Between Holder and Obama, I've never seen so much end around on Congress in my life. Obama uses executive orders, and when he surpassed anyone within the last 70 years or so, now he wants to call them memorandums, to solely confuse people that are pissed at him with his endless EO's. This is a bunch of crap, IMO, and a change to the act from the 60's should be done like every other law.
--------
On Thursday, US Attorney General Eric Holder announced a new interpretation of the Civil Rights Act meant to prevent employers from discriminating against people who claim the status of a transgendered person.
Holder announced in a memo that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination on the basis of sex, also applies to the transgendered.
“This important shift will ensure that the protections of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are extended to those who suffer discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status,” Holder said in the announcement. “This will help to foster fair and consistent treatment for all claimants. And it reaffirms the Justice Department’s commitment to protecting the civil rights of all Americans.”
The new interpretation of the law is aimed at giving the DOJ greater freedom in prosecuting people, businesses, and even government entities accused of discrimination.
While Holder’s memo clarified the DOJ’s position, most courts had already arrived at a similar interpretation in recent litigation.
The move was met with some criticism. After the announcement, Peter Sprigg, senior director for policy studies of the Family Research Council, criticized Holder, saying that the original intent of the 1964 Civil Rights Act most certainly did not cover transgendered people.
“Probably not one person thought they were passing a bill to protect men who wanted to become women or women who wanted to become men,” Sprigg said.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/12/19/doj-employers-cant-discriminate-against-transgendered/
--------
On Thursday, US Attorney General Eric Holder announced a new interpretation of the Civil Rights Act meant to prevent employers from discriminating against people who claim the status of a transgendered person.
Holder announced in a memo that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination on the basis of sex, also applies to the transgendered.
“This important shift will ensure that the protections of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are extended to those who suffer discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status,” Holder said in the announcement. “This will help to foster fair and consistent treatment for all claimants. And it reaffirms the Justice Department’s commitment to protecting the civil rights of all Americans.”
The new interpretation of the law is aimed at giving the DOJ greater freedom in prosecuting people, businesses, and even government entities accused of discrimination.
While Holder’s memo clarified the DOJ’s position, most courts had already arrived at a similar interpretation in recent litigation.
The move was met with some criticism. After the announcement, Peter Sprigg, senior director for policy studies of the Family Research Council, criticized Holder, saying that the original intent of the 1964 Civil Rights Act most certainly did not cover transgendered people.
“Probably not one person thought they were passing a bill to protect men who wanted to become women or women who wanted to become men,” Sprigg said.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/12/19/doj-employers-cant-discriminate-against-transgendered/