김게이: 두 번째 30년 상환부터는 공동명의로

김게이: 두 번째 30년 상환부터는 공동명의로
이제 서울 사는 게이나 레즈비언들은 혼자 살든 둘이 살든 절대 청약 당첨이 될 수가 없겠구나 싶었다. 이전엔 일정 비율에 대해서는 가점 상관없이 무조건 추첨이었기에 그거 하나 바라고 청약을 넣었던 건데, 8월부턴 무조건 가점제가 되었다. 법적인 결혼을 할 수 없는 우리 동성애자들 같은 경우에는 결혼을 한 이성애자 부부들과의 가점 경쟁에서 상대가 될 수가 없다.

기사 보기: 보이스, 동성애, 동성결혼, 결혼, 성소수자, Kr-Gay Voices, 동성 부부, 부동산, 주택, 청약, Korea News

www.huffingtonpost.kr/kimgay/story_b_18115450.html

Trump Administration Tells Court That Discrimination Against Gay Workers is Legal

Trump Administration Tells Court That Discrimination Against Gay Workers is Legal

jeff sessions

In arguments before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, Lawyers for the Trump administration argued that discrimination against gay workers is legal.

The Department of Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) faced off against each other in Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., a case concerning a man who was fired from his job as a skydiving instructor because of his sexual orientation.

According to Freedom For All Americans (FFAF), the en banc hearing (meaning before the full 2nd Circuit court) is a rare phenomenon and a strong indicator of the case’s significance. The court is set to reconsider a 17-year-old legal precedent stating that employment discrimination based on sexual orientation is not prohibited under federal law.

Bloomberg reports:

Judges must interpret laws based on lawmakers’ intent, and Congress didn’t have the LGBT community in mind when it crafted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Justice Department attorney Hashim Mooppan argued on Tuesday in Manhattan. The agency made its case in defense of a New York skydiving company accused of firing a worker for being gay.

“Every circuit court for 50 years has said this isn’t covered,” Mooppan said at the hearing in Manhattan, referring to sexual orientation. He then compared the situation to an employer firing a worker for having an affair or being promiscuous, scenarios that he said have both been deemed legal.

The NYT adds:

A lawyer for the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Jeremy Horowitz, sided with the sky diver, arguing that federal law did prohibit employers from discriminating against employees because they are gay.

But a deputy assistant attorney general with the Justice Department, Hashim M. Mooppan, explained that, under federal law, employers were absolutely free “to regulate employees’ off-the-job sexual behavior,” meaning they could discriminate against employees for adultery, promiscuity or sexual orientation.

Even as the judges were struggling with the underlying legal question, they seemed unsure of what to make of the two government lawyers, each vigorously arguing opposite points.

Writes Mark Joseph Stern at Slate:

When arguments concluded, it seemed inevitable that the court would agree with the EEOC, reject the DOJ’s wackadoodle theories, and find that Title VII already proscribes anti-gay employment discrimination. After Tuesday’s performance, the Justice Department’s involvement in the case may have actually swung a judge or two away from its position; its flagrantly political intrusion seemed to irk even the Republican appointees. Anti-gay activists may have taken control of the DOJ—but they seem unlikely to persuade the 2ndCircuit that America’s gay employees don’t deserve civil rights.

The post Trump Administration Tells Court That Discrimination Against Gay Workers is Legal appeared first on Towleroad.


Trump Administration Tells Court That Discrimination Against Gay Workers is Legal